Common Fallacies

A Dicto Secundum Quid ad Dictum Simpliciter (Converse Fallacy of the Accident)
Someone provides an argument which works in one situation but for use in another situation and leaves out a needed qualification that is needed in the latter situation.
A Dicto Simpliciter Quid ad Dictum Secundum (Fallacy of the Accident)
Someone argues from a general case to a particular case but leaves out needed qualifications of the latter.
Amphiboly
Someone makes a mistake in syntactical interpretation of the premises that leads them to a wrong conclusion.
Argumentum ad Antiquitatem
Someone supports a conclusion because it is an old belief or it has always been accepted.
Argumentum ad Baculum
Someone threatens to do harm to others unless they accept his/her conclusion.
Argumentum ad Hominem
Someone has put forth an argument and another person responds to the former's argument by attacking the person who put forth that argument, not addressing the soundness, validity, or cogency of the argument itself.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
Someone supports his/her conclusion by citing as evidence to accept their conlcusion the absence of any proof for or against their conclusion.
Argumentum ad Logicam (The Fallacy Fallacy)
Someone argues that another conclusion is false because the propositions used to support the latter conclusion are false.
Argumentum ad Misericordiam
Someone tries to evoke pity from others so they will accept the former's conclusion.
Argumentum ad Nauseam
Someone assumes that a conclusion is true, more likely to be true, or more likely to be accepted as true, the more often it is heard.
Argumentum ad Novitatem
Someone assumes a conclusion is true because it is a newer conclusion.
Argumentum ad Populum
Someone tries to convince others that they should accept his/her conclusion because the conclusion is accepted by a particular group of people.
Argumentum ad Verecundiam
Someone supports his/her conclusion by appealing to an unqualified authority on the matter.
Bifurcation (Black and White fallacy)
Someone assumes something is either one way or the other.
Complex Questions
Someone uses a question to try and trap another person into answering, and any answer leads to the conclusion the arguer wishes to reach. A complex question is actually more than one question rolled into one question, but it appears that only one answer can be given.
Composition
Someone assumes that if the parts have a certain attribute, so does the whole.
Division
Someone assumes that if the whole has a certain attribute, so do all the parts.
Equivocation
Someone uses a word in two different senses and draws a conclusion as if the word was used in only one sense.
Fallacy of Accident
Someone supports his/her conclusion by making use of a particular example supposedly falling under a general rule when the general rule actually doesn't cover that particular example.
False Dichotomy
Someone uses a false disjunctive statement as a premise in order to prove one side of the either-or statement false so that others will be forced to accept the former's conclusion.
Hasty Generalization
Someone draws a conclusion based on a generalization of a sample group when it is reasonable to believe that the sample group is not representative of the whole.
Ignoratio Elenchi (Missing the Point)
Someone draws a slightly different conclusion from the premises of his/her argument than the conclusion that the argument actually supports.
Non Causa Pro Causa (Not the Cause for the Cause)
Someone draws a conclusion of causation based on coincidence, correlation, or mistaking cause for the effect.
Oversimplified Cause
Someone draws a conclusion of effect from one or a group of causes while ignoring other contributing causes.
Petitio Principii (Begging the Question)
Someone presumes his/her conclusion as if he/she has provided a sufficient argument for that conclusion but has left out an essential premise that would determine the arguments validity or the arguer assumes as one of his/her premises the conclusion in a different form so that the argument is circular.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (After This, Therefore on Account of This)
Someone draws a conclusion of causation based on temporal succession.
Red Herring
Someone has put forth an argument and another person responds to the former's argument by changing the argument from the original argument to a related argument and then the latter proves their point on the related argument as if they had proved their point as far as the original argument is concerned.
Slippery Slope
Someone draws a conclusion based on an ultimate effect produced by an chain of events when there is not sufficient reason to believe in that chain of events.
Straw Man
Someone has put forth an argument and another person responds to the former's argument by mischaracterizing the former's argument in a slightly different and weaker form and defeating the weaker argument as if they had defeated the real argument.
Suppressing Evidence
Someone ignores evidence that would reasonably change the conclusion that that person has put forth to others.
Weak Analogy
Someone draws a conclusion based on a weak analogy between the two related things or situations.
Unnamed Fallacy
There should be a fallacy of dismissing a person's earlier argument because they changed their mind or evolved to a new position.
Unnamed Fallacy
There should be a fallacy of dismissing an argument because a person is a novice or ignorant.

Home Page

2009