Short List of Fallacies

This material is taken from the book The Fallacy Detective.

Avoiding the Question

1. Red Herring: Where someone introduces an irrelevant point into an argument. He may think (or he may want us to think) it proves his side, but it really doesn’t.

  • Grizzly bears can’t be dangerous – they look so cute.
  • When the presidential candidate was asked whether he’d name as a running mate someone who was opposed to abortion, he replied: “It would be incredibly presumptive for someone who has yet to earn his party’s nomination to be picking a vice president. However, the main criterion I would use in choosing a running mate would be whether the person was capable of being president.”

2. Ad Hominem: Where someone attacks an opponent’s character, or his motives for believing something, instead of disproving his opponent’s argument.

  • Jenny: “My uncle says that all murderers should be put to death because then nobody would want to murder anybody anymore.” Sylvia: “Wasn’t your uncle in jail once? I don’t think that we can trust somebody’s opinion who was once a criminal.”
  • I know everybody thinks Einstein’s theory of relativity is correct, but I can’t accept it. Einstein believed in evolution.

3. Genetic Fallacy: Where someone condemns an argument because of where it began, how it began, or who began it.

  • Jenny: “I think abortion is the murder of innocent children.” Clyde: “The only reason why you disagree with abortion is because you were abused as a child and you have never recovered from it.”
  • Bert: “Mr Gritchus, why do you always wear suspenders and never a belt?” Mr Gritchus: “Because belts were developed in the military centuries ago and were used by soldiers. Since the military is evil, and belts came from the military, therefore I can’t wear a belt.”

4. Tu Quoque (You Too): Where someone dismisses your viewpoint on an issue because you are yourself inconsistent in that very thing.

  • Fred: “I wouldn’t smoke cigarettes if I were you. It is a bad habit and it will bring you all kinds of problems.” Jake: “Don’t tell me not to smoke. You do it, too.”
  • “I don’t see what is wrong with speeding – everybody does it.”

5. Faulty Appeal to Authority: Where someone appeals to the authority of someone who has no special knowledge in the area they are discussing.

  • My car mechanic says the best way to fix computer problems is to just give the computer a good, sharp kick.
  • Bert: “I’ve been homeschooled all of my life, and I think it has helped me out a lot.” Clyde: “The man who has the highest IQ in the world said he didn’t think homeschooling turned out good citizens. He said he didn’t think homeschoolers received enough socialization, so they will become social misfits. Do you still think homeschooling is a good idea?”

6. Appeal to the People: Where someone claims his viewpoint is correct just because many other people agree with it.

  • Political Candidate: “My opponent says abortion is murder – despite the fact that a recent poll concluded 76% of Americans believe an abortion does not murder an innocent child.”
  • It looks as if more people vacation in Florida than any other place. It must be the nicest place in America to visit.

Making Assumptions

1. Circular Reasoning: Where someone attempts to prove his conclusion by simply restating it. He says “P is true because Q is true, and Q is true because P is true.”

  • Jimmy: Dad, why do I have to learn logic? Dad: Because it will help to develop your mind. Jimmy: Why will it develop my mind? Dad: Because it will help you think better.

2. Equivocation: Where the meaning of a word is changed in the middle of an argument.

  • If the English don’t drive on the right side of the road, what are they doing on the wrong side?
  • Dad: “Son, when you grow up I want you to always be a responsible young man.” Son: “But Dad, I am already very responsible. Whenever something breaks around here, it seems as if I am always responsible.”

3. Loaded Question: Where someone asks one question which assumes the answer to a second question.

  • Neighbor: “Why do you like to disturb the neighborhood by playing your music so loud everybody can hear it a mile away?” [Does the neighbor really like to disturb the neighborhood?]
  • Judge: “Have you stopped beating your poor dog yet?” [Has he ever begun beating his dog?]

4. Part-to-Whole: Where someone asserts that what is true of part of something must also be true of the whole thing together.

  • Child: “Mommy, why is this feather pillow so heavy? It only has feathers in it and little feathers weigh hardly anything.”
  • If I can break this bunch of sticks, one by one, Mommy, why can’t I break a bunch of sticks together?

5. Whole-to-Part: Where someone asserts that what is true of something as a whole must also be true of each of its parts. This is the reverse of the part-to-whole fallacy.

  • If our bag of potato chips won’t float when I throw it in the pond, why will one of my potato chips float by itself?
  • If I can’t break this bunch of sticks, all at once, Mommy, shouldn’t I be able to break each individual stick?

6. Either-Or: Where someone asserts that we must chose between two things, when in fact we have more alternatives.

  • Either you’re an American or you are a Communist. You aren’t from America, so you must be a Communist.
  • Either you believe in evolution, or you are totally irrational. You say you don’t believe in evolution, so you must be irrational.

Statistical Fallacies

1. Hasty Generalization: Where someone generalizes about a class or group based upon a small and poor sample.

  • All plumbers are brilliant. I know a plumber who can calculate Pi to the 289,954th digit.
  • “Southerners talk fast. I was just on the phone with one and he sure talked fast.”

2. Weak Analogy: Where someone claims that some items which have only a few minor similarities are practically the same in almost everything else.

  • Clyde: “I think it is all right for governments in developing countries to execute citizens who don’t agree with the government. If you want to make an omelet, then you have to break a few eggs.”
  • A cloud is 75% water. A watermelon is 75% water. Since a plane can fly through a cloud, therefore a plane can fly through a watermelon.

3. Post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc: Where someone assumes that since A happened before B, A must have caused B.

  • Our rooster crows every morning. Then the sun comes up. Now do you understand how important roosters are?
  • Christianity came along in the first century, and a few hundred years after that, the Roman Empire fell. Christianity must have made it fall.

4. Proof-by-lack-of-evidence: Where someone claims something is true simply because nobody has yet given them any evidence to the contrary.

  • “There must be mountain lions living in Illinois, because I haven’t seen any proof that none exist.”
  • No evidence has been found that life does not exist on other planets. Therefore, we are not alone in the universe.

Propaganda

1. Appeal to Fear: Where someone moves you to fear the consequences of not doing what he wants.

  • Prosecuting Attorney: “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I urge you to convict John Jones of this crime of murder. We need to put him where he can never commit any crimes. If you don’t convict him, you may be his next victim.”
  • Restaurant owner: “You no lika’ da’ pizzas? I send over my cousin Tony for a little change a’ mind. He maka’ you lika’ da’ pizzas.”
  • Do you know what kind of damage a loose cow can do on your farm. Imagine what would happen if your electric fence failed and your cows wandered into the neighbors field. Buy a “Zapper” electric fence and you won’t have to worry about it.

2. Appeal to Pity: Where someone urges us to do something only because we pity him, or we pity something associated with him.

  • Radio advertisement: “Mr Jones lost the last election because his opponent used a smear campaign to discredit him. Mr Jones lost the election before that because of voter fraud. Don’t you think it is about time you voted for Mr Jones?”
  • Motorist: “But officer, this is the fifth ticket I’ve been given this year. If I get another ticket, then they will take my license away, and I won’t be able to drive to work. My wife and children will starve.”

3. Bandwagon: Where someone pressures us to do something just because many other people like us are doing it.

  • Clyde: “Dad, can I go to see the movie “Attack of the Killer Wombats?” Dad: “No, son, you can’t go. I heard that movie has bad things in it.” Clyde: “Awe, come on, everybody’s going to see it.”
  • “More Americans get their news from ABC than from any other source.”

4. Exigency: Where someone offers nothing more than a time limit as a reason for us to do what he wants.

  • Genuine lead teacups! Now 95% off! Hurry, while supplies last!
  • Mr: “Come on, why don’t you marry me today?” Miss: “Oh, I can’t make up my mind. I only met you this morning. Don’t you think it is a little early.” Mr: “I’m leaving tonight and won’t be back for several years. If you don’t marry me now, we may never have another chance.”

5. Repetition: Where a message is repeated loudly and very often in the hope that it will eventually be believed.

  • “Eat Sugarloops for breakfast! Eat Sugarloops for lunch! Eat Sugarloops for supper! Eat Sugarloops all the time! You will love Sugarloops.

6. Transfer: Where an advertiser gets us to associate our good or bad feelings about one thing, to another unrelated thing.

  • In a commercial, a handsome man with big bulging muscles is seen working out on the new “Gutwrencher” exercise machine. The announcer says, “Tone up your muscles in two weeks!”
  • In a commercial, Gara Gorgeous, the famous movie star with beautiful hair, holds up a bottle of shampoo and says. “Use Shimmer Bounce shampoo for better looking and better smelling hair.”
  • “Purefresh Mountain Spring Water”

7. Snob Appeal: Where someone encourages us to think his product would make us better, or stand out, from everybody else.

  • Advertisement: “Why read those boring logic books like everybody else does? You know you’re better than that. You need more intellectual stimulation. Read The Fallacy Detective. Be more logical than the rest.”
  • Buy skunk brand perfume. You will stand out in the crowd.

8. Appeal to Tradition: Where we are encouraged to buy a product or do something because it is associated with something old.

  • A black and white photograph of man building a guitar. The caption reads: “Play Martin Guitars. Our expert guitar craftsmen build guitars using only the most time honored traditions.”
  • A black and white photograph of an old 1920’s coupe on one page, and on the next a picture of a smart modern looking coupe whizzing down the road. Caption reads: “Ford Thunderbird: yesterday, today and tomorrow.”

9. Appeal to Hi-tech: Where someone urges us to buy something because it is the “latest thing” – but not necessarily because it is the best thing.

  • Clyde: “Hey Bert, you need to buy one of these new Niko shoes. They have hi-tech “Dinotraction.” It’s a new special feature that helps you cling onto the back of a running plesiosaur without falling off.”
  • Our “Laundry Ball” cleans your clothes automatically with our patented method of defusing the ionization of the fetezoic acids and implanting a catalyst.

Facebook Comments

Site Comments

1 • Kathy A. Johnson • April 30, 2008 • 2:56 PM

This is great!  I am trying to start a debate club at a “gifted” public elementary school!  My husband who has his Ph.D. in Theology, gave me three things to teach:

1.  Attack ad hominem
2.  Red herring
3.  Strawman

You have given me much more! P. S. Any debate coaches out there?  Please send me your tips!  Thank you Christianlogic!

2 • Kyle • July 07, 2008 • 11:55 PM

Thank you, nice n’ short, but great explanations and examples

3 • DRAKULIAN • September 08, 2008 • 7:06 PM

“THE EXCEPTION THAT DISPROVES THE RULE” This argument is a type of fallacious generalization and fallacy of composition (Whole-to-Part) in which a person attempts to debunk a known, accepted and/or official rule or law solely by simply citing there may be one or more exceptions to that rule, all the while failing to acknowledge the obvious fact that an exception is an exactly that, an exception only.

EXAMPLE 1: Fact - marijuana use is prohibit by law, but… “If smoking marijuana is legal for cancer patients, then it should be legal for everyone.”

EXAMPLE 2: Fact - murder is a capital offense, but… “if it is acceptable to kill in self-defense, it should be acceptable to kill people because they wronged me in some way.”

4 • mk starr • April 08, 2009 • 10:57 AM

Fabulous

5 • Christine Giles • April 30, 2009 • 10:04 PM

Looks like a good primer for critical thinking….good examples…non threatening…

6 • melrose • October 05, 2009 • 10:26 PM

thanks to this website. making my project is as easy as clicking…. ??thanks

7 • Samwise • December 26, 2009 • 10:58 AM

I actually had this exchange with a brother(?)...“The Holy Spirit has told me that you have an unhealthy interest in theology.”

I replied, “That’s funny, the Holy Spirit has told me that I have a healthy interest in theology.”

So I asked him, “If the Holy Spirit told you to disobey a clear Scripture verse would you do that?”

He replied that, “He would believe the Holy Spirit over the clear Scripture verse!”

Some weird appeal to authority???

8 • mayryn • March 07, 2010 • 11:30 PM

why is it that your fallacies are in complete? can you please give some examples of the following fallacies:
a.fallacy of misproportion
b.fallacy of extemism or one-sidedness
c. fallacy of figurative definition
d.fallacy of unwarranted statistic
e. fallacy of self-contradiction
f.fallay of accidentalo correlation
g. fallacy of unknowable statistics

9 • BeirutEamon • March 10, 2010 • 12:29 PM

Nice list, Nathaniel.  Thanks for all your effort.  Mayryn, the link you clicked on said “short list of fallacies”, not “exhaustive list of fallacies”. 

What fallacy is that?  Fallacy of expectation?  😉

10 • ivan fisk • April 19, 2010 • 9:09 AM

O_O
its nice, its also kind of funny. nice list

11 • Stephen • July 12, 2010 • 12:28 PM

What fallacy is it when you change “appeal to authority” to “faulty appeal to authority”?

•My computer technician says the best way to fix computer problems is to just give the computer a good, sharp kick.
And that must be right because he’s my computer technician.

The above is a fallacy. The computer technician can be wrong.

And appealing to the Authority of God is also a logica fallacy because you have not proven he even exists.

I have yet to see Theists make a case without resorting to some of those fallacies.

12 • aimz • August 01, 2010 • 8:39 AM

nice.. but their are lots of fallacies were not included..

13 • Merri Barnousky • September 04, 2010 • 4:47 PM

I like this list a lot… but I have to say, a running plesiosaur is an interesting mental picture considering they had flippers! 😊

14 • ivy • September 09, 2010 • 8:35 AM

why your fallacies are incomplete? can you please give me some examples of fallacy of misproportion?

15 • Marie • September 19, 2010 • 6:59 PM

I’m wondering if there is a name for this logical fallacy:

A professor says that a majority of people born into their social class, stay in that given social class. Or that over fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce. The class then spends the majority of refuting these statistics with specific examples of how the statistic isn’t true. It’s sort of an appeal to individual experience as a attempt to refute conclusions based on statistical probability and I find that it shuts down constructive class conversation. I’d love to know if there is a term for this type of argument.

16 • Stephen • October 12, 2010 • 6:52 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

I believe the word you are looking for is “anecdotal”.

17 • DRAKULIAN • October 15, 2010 • 6:49 PM

“I’d love to know if there is a term for this type of argument.” - Marie

~~~ Try reading the other comments. If you had read my post at the top of the comments I already covered this. ~~~

““THE EXCEPTION THAT DISPROVES THE RULE” This argument is a type of fallacious generalization and fallacy of composition (Whole-to-Part) in which a person attempts to debunk a known, accepted and/or official rule or law solely by simply citing there may be one or more exceptions to that rule, all the while failing to acknowledge the obvious fact that an exception is an exactly that, an exception only.
EXAMPLE 1: Fact - marijuana use is prohibit by law, but… “If smoking marijuana is legal for cancer patients, then it should be legal for everyone.”
EXAMPLE 2: Fact - murder is a capital offense, but… “if it is acceptable to kill in self-defense, it should be acceptable to kill people because they wronged me in some way.””

~~~ Kids these days act as though any exception to anything disproves a thing, which is a wholly wrong and fallacious way to argue. An exception is an exception, not an absolute litmus test that proves said thing wrong. ~~~

Also, @ Stephen, all experiences are not anecdotal, and even then anecdotal evidence is not necessarily wrong or fallacious.

18 • Stephen • October 20, 2010 • 10:07 AM

All experiences are anecdotal unless they are part of a controlled study.  That is what an anecdote is.  It is merely a retelling of an experience.

And it’s not being wrong that makes something a fallacy.  Something is a fallacy because it is not a reliable source of evidence.

Even when an anecdote is true(most actually are) it is not evidence.

19 • DRAKULIAN • October 29, 2010 • 5:46 PM

“All experiences are anecdotal unless they are part of a controlled study.” - Stephen

False. If an experience is raw recorded without the person’s knowledge then it’s not anecdotal even though it wasn’t “controlled”. Even if the person knows they’re being recorded the evidence is not necessarily anecdotal either. And anecdotes can also be true if they can be corroborated by multiple unrelated sources including other eyewitnesses or if by some other form of recording, such as audio or other.

“And it’s not being wrong that makes something a fallacy.” - Stephen

False. If something is wrong then it is fallacious, but yes, the point is that the basis or way in which something is approached can be a fallacious method. In other words it’s both how it’s approached and whether the answer is indeed correct or not. Someone can use a flawed method and arrive at the correct answer, just as well as someone can use a logical method and arrive at a fallacious conclusion. It can be, and frequently is, both.

“Something is a fallacy because it is not a reliable source of evidence.” - Stephen

Your comment is fallacious. Just because someone or something is unreliable some of the time you are assuming they/it must therefore be unreliable all of the time. Your comment is incorrect and is also known primarily as the fallacy of composition.

“Even when an anecdote is true(most actually are) it is not evidence.” - Stephen

Again, wrong. Wrong because it is incorrect to say that anecdotal evidence is automatically “not evidence”, it can easily be evidence. Also, most anecdotes aren’t fully true or false, they tend to be a mixture of both, an incomplete picture if you will, and anecdotal evidence is still a form of evidence that can be validated. If an anecdote can be shown to be true through other corroborating evidence then it is not fallacious, assuming the method used to determine its truth was valid.

Anecdotes are never just automatically fallacious in and of themselves, it’s how they’re used that makes or breaks them. There is no rule I’ve ever heard of that states that everything outside of double-blind studies and video is fallacious based solely on the premise that it’s anecdotal. It is specifically ** the misuse of ** anecdotal evidence that makes it a logical fallacy.

20 • Stephen • July 04, 2011 • 8:59 PM

“Your comment is fallacious. Just because someone or something is unreliable some of the time you are assuming they/it must therefore be unreliable all of the time. Your comment is incorrect and is also known primarily as the fallacy of composition.”

You would need some method of knowing when it is reliable and when it is not.
Without that other method the anecdote isn’t reliable.

“If an anecdote can be shown to be true through other corroborating evidence then it is not fallacious, assuming the method used to determine its truth was valid.”

It would be the corroborating evidence that is the evidence, not the anecdote.

21 • rockstar • July 06, 2011 • 12:01 AM

WOW ! this is wonderful…....site easy to understand with example..

22 • DRAKULIAN • July 19, 2011 • 12:58 PM

@Stephen, no idea where you’re coming up with this stuff, but what you’re saying isn’t correct at all. An anecdote most certainly can be evidence, hence the phrase “anecdotal evidence”. Just because another source can be used to corroborate it doesn’t mean it suddenly doesn’t count. There is also a thing called credibility and reasonable doubt. Next you’ll claim that circumstantial evidence doesn’t count either; it most certainly can, and does in many cases.

The mistake I see you making is the degree of certainty mistake. Certainty is a tricky thing because almost nothing is ever universal or absolute. Anecdotal evidence and circumstantial evidence can be weighed in light of other corroborating evidence and credibility to determine if the evidence is reasonable or not. You are speaking in terms of absolute certitude, which is not only unnecessary, but unrealistic.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Sign Up!

Join the The Fallacy Detective News and receive "The Fallacy Detective Test" for free!