CAPTAIN SODA

Formal fallacies

Formal fallacies are arguments that are fallacious due to an error in their form or technical structure. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs.

Appeal to probability: because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen. This is the premise on which Murphy’s Law is based.

Argument from fallacy: if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion must necessarily be false.

Bare bumertion fallacy: premise in an argument is bumumed to be true purely because it says that it is true.

Base rate fallacy: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.

Conjunction fallacy: bumumption that an outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probable than an outcome satisfying a single one of them.

Correlative based fallacies

Denying the correlative: where attempts are made at introducing alternatives where there are none

Suppressed correlative: where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible

Fallacy of necessity: a degree of unwarranted necessity is placed in the conclusion based on the necessity of one or more of its premises

False dilemma (false dichotomy): where two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are several

If-by-whiskey: An answer that takes side of the questioner’s suggestive question

Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion or irrelevant thesis)

Homunculus fallacy: where a “middle-man” is used for explanation, this usually leads to regressive middle-man explanations without actually explaining the real nature of a function or a process

Masked man fallacy: the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one

Naturalistic fallacy: a fallacy that claims that if something is natural, then it is “good” or “right”

Nirvana fallacy: when solutions to problems are said not to be right because they are not perfect

Negative Proof fallacy: that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false

Package-deal fallacy: when two or more things having been linked together by tradition or culture are said to stay that way forever

[edit]

Propositional fallacies

Propositional fallacies:

Affirming a disjunct: concluded that one logical disjunction must be false because the other disjunct is true.

Affirming the consequent: the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A

Denying the antecedent: the consequent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be false because the antecedent is false; if A, then B; not A, therefore not B

[edit]

Quantificational fallacies

Quantificational fallacies:

Existential fallacy: an argument has two universal premises and a particular conclusion, but the premises do not establish the truth of the conclusion

Proof by example: where things are proven by giving an example

[edit]

Formal syllogistic fallacies

Syllogistic fallacies are logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms.

Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise

Fallacy of exclusive premises: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative.

Fallacy of four terms: a categorical syllogism has four terms.

Illicit major: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion.

Illicit minor: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its minor term is undistributed in the minor premise but distributed in the conclusion.

Fallacy of the undistributed middle: the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed.

[edit]

Informal fallacies

Informal fallacies are arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (“formal”Log in to see images! flaws.

Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam)

Appeal to ridicule: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by presenting the opponent’s argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous

Argument from ignorance (“appeal to ignorance”Log in to see images!: The fallacy of bumuming that something is true/false because it has not been proven false/true. For example: “The student has failed to prove that he didn’t cheat on the test, therefore he must have cheated on the test.”

Begging the question (“petitio principii”Log in to see images!: where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly bumumed in one of the premises

Burden of proof

Circular cause and consequence

Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard)

Correlation does not imply causation (great times hoc ergo propter hoc)

Equivocation

Fallacies of distribution

Division: where one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts

Ecological fallacy

Fallacy of many questions (complex question, fallacy of presupposition, loaded question, plurium interrogationum)

Fallacy of the single cause

Historian’s fallacy

False attribution

Fallacy of quoting out of context

False compromise/middle ground

Gambler’s fallacy: the incorrect belief that the likelihood of a random event can be affected by or predicted from other, independent events

Incomplete comparison

Inconsistent comparison

Intentional fallacy

Loki’s Wager

Moving the goalpost

No true Scotsman

Perfect solution fallacy: where an argument bumumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it was implemented

Post hoc ergo propter hoc: also known as false cause, coincidental correlation or correlation not causation.

Proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium)

Psychologist’s fallacy

Regression fallacy

Reification (hypostatization)

Retrospective determinism (it happened so it was bound to)

Special pleading: where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption

Suppressed correlative: an argument which tries to redefine a correlative (two mutually exclusive options) so that one alternative encompbumes the other, thus making one alternative impossible

Wrong direction

[edit]

Faulty generalizations

Faulty generalizations:

Accident (fallacy): when an exception to the generalization is ignored

Cherry picking

Composition: where one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some (or even every) part of the whole

Dicto simpliciter

Converse accident (a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter): when an exception to a generalization is wrongly called for

False analogy

Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid)

Loki’s Wager: insistence that because a concept cannot be clearly defined, it cannot be discussed

Misleading vividness

Overwhelming exception

Spotlight fallacy

Thought-terminating cliché: a commonly used phrase, sometimes pbuming as folk wisdom, used to quell cognitive dissonance.

[edit]

Red herring fallacies

A red herring is an argument, given in response to another argument, which does not address the original issue. See also irrelevant conclusion

Ad hominem: attacking the personal instead of the argument. A form of this is reductio ad Hitlerum.

Argumentum ad baculum (“appeal to force”, “appeal to the stick”Log in to see images!: where an argument is made through coercion or threats of force towards an opposing party

Argumentum ad populum (“appeal to belief”, “appeal to the majority”, “appeal to the people”Log in to see images!: where a proposition is claimed to be true solely because many people believe it to be true

bumociation fallacy & Guilt by bumociation

Appeal to authority: where an bumertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person bumerting it

Appeal to consequences: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument concludes a premise is either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences for a particular party

Appeal to emotion: where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning

Appeal to fear: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side

Wishful thinking: a specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason

Appeal to spite: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people’s bitterness or spite towards an opposing party

Appeal to flattery: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made due to the use of flattery to gather support

Appeal to motive: where a premise is dismissed, by calling into question the motives of its proposer

Appeal to novelty: where a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern

Appeal to poverty (argumentum ad lazarum)

Appeal to wealth (argumentum ad crumenam)

Argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio)

Appeal to tradition: where a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it has a long-standing tradition behind it

Chronological snobbery: where a thesis is deemed incorrect because it was commonly held when something else, clearly false, was also commonly held

Genetic fallacy

Judgmental language

Poisoning the well

Sentimental fallacy: it would be more pleasant if; therefore it ought to be; therefore it is

Straw man argument

Style over substance fallacy

Texas sharpshooter fallacy

Two wrongs make a right

Tu quoque

[edit]

Conditional or questionable fallacies

Definist fallacy

Luddite fallacy

Slippery slope