Glossary of Fallacies

Abusive Ad Hominem – Attacking an opponent personally instead of addressing their argument.
Accent, Misleading – Directing someone to an unwarranted conclusion by placing improper emphasis on a word or phrase or taking statements out of context.
Affirming the Consequent – Assuming that because a conditional statement’s consequent is true, its antecedent must also be true.
Ambiguity – Using a word or phrase with multiple meanings without clarifying which meaning is intended.
Appeal to Common Opinion – Urging acceptance of a position because many people agree with it or rejection because few do.
Appeal to Force or Threat – Using threats instead of evidence to persuade.
Appeal to Irrelevant Authority – Supporting a claim by citing an authority who is not an expert in the field or who is biased.
Appeal to Self-Interest – Urging acceptance or rejection of a claim based solely on personal benefits rather than relevant evidence.
Appeal to Tradition – Arguing that something should continue simply because it has always been done.
Arguing from Ignorance – Claiming something is true or false because it has not been proven otherwise.
Arguing in a Circle (Begging the Question) – Using a premise that assumes the truth of the conclusion.
Argument by Innuendo – Suggesting a derogatory conclusion without explicitly stating it.
Attacking a Straw Man – Misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make it easier to refute.
Authority, Appeal to Irrelevant – See Appeal to Irrelevant Authority.
Causal Oversimplification – Assigning an insufficient or exaggerated cause to an event.
Common Cause, Neglect of a – Failing to recognize that two related events may be effects of a common cause rather than causally linked.
Complex Question – Phrasing a question in a way that assumes an unproven premise or treats multiple questions as having the same answer.
Composition, Fallacy of – Assuming that what is true of a part is true of the whole.
Confusion of Cause and Effect – Mistaking an effect for a cause.
Confusion of a Necessary with a Sufficient Condition – Assuming that a necessary condition is also sufficient.
Continuum, Fallacy of the – Arguing that small differences along a continuum are insignificant, making distinctions arbitrary.
Contradiction Between Premise and Conclusion – Drawing a conclusion that contradicts at least one premise.
Contrary-to-Fact Hypothesis – Making claims about what would have happened under different circumstances without sufficient evidence.
Counterevidence, Denying the – Refusing to seriously consider evidence against one’s claim.
Counterevidence, Ignoring the – Omitting or failing to acknowledge significant opposing evidence.
Denying the Antecedent – Assuming that if the antecedent of a conditional statement is false, the consequent must also be false.
Distinction Without a Difference – Creating a linguistic distinction without a meaningful difference.
Division, Fallacy of – Assuming that what is true of a whole is also true of its parts.
Domino Fallacy (Slippery Slope) – Assuming that a particular action will lead inevitably to a series of events without sufficient evidence.
Drawing the Wrong Conclusion – Concluding something unrelated to the evidence presented.
Emotions, Manipulation of – Exploiting emotions instead of presenting logical evidence.
End Term, Illicit Distribution of an – Using a term in the conclusion of a syllogism that was not properly distributed in the premises.
Equivocation – Using a word in different senses within the same argument without clarification.
False Alternatives (False Dilemma) – Presenting a situation as having only a limited set of options when more exist.
False Conversion – Incorrectly reversing the subject and predicate in a statement while assuming its truth remains unchanged.
Faulty Analogy – Assuming that because two things are alike in one way, they must be alike in another, without considering significant differences.
Force or Threat, Appeal to – See Appeal to Force or Threat.
Gambler’s Fallacy – Believing that past random events affect the probability of future ones.
Genetic Fallacy – Judging something based solely on its origin rather than its current validity.
Humor or Ridicule, Resort to – Using humor or ridicule to avoid responding to an argument.
Ignorance, Arguing from – See Arguing from Ignorance.
Illicit Contrast – Drawing an unstated contrasting conclusion by emphasizing certain words in another’s statement.
Incompatible Premises – Drawing a conclusion from contradictory premises.
Innuendo, Argument by – See Argument by Innuendo.
Insufficient Sample (Hasty Generalization) – Generalizing based on too small a sample.
Is-Ought Fallacy – Assuming that because something is the case, it ought to be the case.
Manipulation of Emotions – See Emotions, Manipulation of.
Mean, Fallacy of (Middle Ground Fallacy) – Assuming the middle position between two extremes is the correct one without justification.
Middle Term, Undistributed – Using a middle term in a syllogism without properly distributing it at least once.
Misleading Accent – See Accent, Misleading.
Misuse of a Principle – Applying a rule as if it has no exceptions or dismissing it based on an exception.
Misuse of a Vague Expression – Using an imprecise term to establish a conclusion or misinterpreting vague language.
Neglect of a Common Cause – See Common Cause, Neglect of a.
Omission of Key Evidence – Constructing an argument that leaves out critical supporting evidence.
Poisoning the Well – Discrediting a source beforehand to dismiss their arguments.
Popular Wisdom, Fallacy of – Relying on clichés, proverbs, or folk wisdom instead of evidence.
Post Hoc Fallacy – Assuming that because one event follows another, the first must have caused the second.
Principle, Misuse of a – See Misuse of a Principle.
Question-Begging Definition – Defining a term in a way that assumes a controversial claim is already settled.
Question-Begging Language – Using language that assumes the conclusion of an argument within its wording.
Rationalization – Using seemingly logical but false reasons to justify a belief held for other motives.
Red Herring – Distracting from the main issue by introducing an unrelated topic.
Resort to Humor or Ridicule – See Humor or Ridicule, Resort to.
Self-Interest, Appeal to – See Appeal to Self-Interest.
Special Pleading – Applying rules to others while exempting oneself without justification.
Straw Man, Attacking a – See Attacking a Straw Man.
Tradition, Appeal to – See Appeal to Tradition.
Trivial Objections – Focusing on minor points rather than addressing the main argument.
Two-Wrongs Fallacy (Tu Quoque) – Defending oneself by accusing the critic of similar faults instead of responding to the argument.
Undistributed Middle Term – See Middle Term, Undistributed.
Unrepresentative Data – Using biased or unrepresentative data to support a conclusion.
Using the Wrong Reasons – Supporting a claim with irrelevant or inappropriate reasons.
Vague Expression, Misuse of a – See Misuse of a Vague Expression.
Wishful Thinking – Assuming something is true because one wants it to be true.
Wrong Conclusion, Drawing the – Drawing a conclusion unrelated to the premises.
Wrong Reasons, Using the – See Using the Wrong Reasons.