Ad hominem: Attacking the person instead of the argument Straw man: Misrepresenting someone's view to make it easier to attack False dilemma: Presenting only two options when more exist Slippery slope: Claiming one step will inevitably lead to extreme results without evidence Appeal to authority: Treating a claim as true only because an authority said it, especially outside their field Appeal to popularity: Arguing something is true because many people believe it Bandwagon: Urging someone to do it because everyone else is Appeal to tradition: Arguing something is right because it has always been done Appeal to novelty: Arguing something is better because it is new Appeal to emotion: Using feelings in place of evidence Appeal to pity: Using sympathy to win agreement Appeal to fear: Using scare tactics instead of evidence Appeal to nature: Claiming something is good because it is natural Appeal to ignorance: Claiming something is true because it has not been proven false Circular reasoning: The conclusion is assumed in the premise Begging the question: Treating the thing to be proved as already true Hasty generalization: Drawing a broad conclusion from too few examples Anecdotal evidence: Using a personal story as proof of a general claim Cherry-picking: Choosing only data that supports your claim Post hoc ergo propter hoc: Assuming A caused B because B followed A Correlation is not causation: Two things changing together does not show one causes the other Red herring: Introducing an irrelevant topic to distract Tu quoque: Dismissing a point because the speaker does the same thing Genetic fallacy: Judging an idea by its origin instead of its merits Guilt by association: Rejecting an idea because of who supports it Poisoning the well: Discrediting a source before it can speak Equivocation: Using a word in two different senses in one argument Composition fallacy: Assuming what is true of parts is true of the whole Division fallacy: Assuming what is true of the whole is true of each part Burden of proof shift: Demanding others disprove a claim instead of supporting it No true Scotsman: Redefining a group to exclude counterexamples Moving the goalposts: Changing the standard of proof after it has been met Loaded question: A question that contains an unfair assumption Middle ground fallacy: Assuming the truth must lie halfway between two positions Texas sharpshooter: Finding patterns after the fact and ignoring the rest of the data Gambler's fallacy: Believing past random events change future odds Sunk cost fallacy: Continuing because of what was already invested Special pleading: Excusing your own case from a rule without good reason False cause: Claiming a causal link without proof Non sequitur: A conclusion that does not follow from the premises Affirming the consequent: If P then Q; Q, therefore P (invalid) Denying the antecedent: If P then Q; not P, therefore not Q (invalid) Modus ponens: If P then Q; P; therefore Q (valid) Modus tollens: If P then Q; not Q; therefore not P (valid) Syllogism: A deductive argument with two premises and a conclusion Deductive reasoning: Moving from general premises to a certain conclusion Inductive reasoning: Moving from specific cases to a probable general conclusion Sound argument: A valid argument with true premises Valid argument: A conclusion that follows logically from the premises Weak analogy: Comparing things that are not alike in relevant ways Ambiguity fallacy: Relying on unclear wording to mislead Fallacy of the single cause: Blaming one factor for a complex outcome Appeal to accomplishment: Dismissing a claim because of someone's success or lack of it Argument from incredulity: Claiming something is false because it is hard to imagine Naturalistic fallacy: Deriving what ought to be from what is Survivorship bias: Focusing on successes and overlooking the failures Confirmation bias: Favoring information that fits existing beliefs False equivalence: Treating two very different things as equal Appeal to the stone: Dismissing a claim as absurd without showing why Hasty conclusion from small sample: Overgeneralizing from limited cases Ad populum: Latin name for appeal to the crowd Ad verecundiam: Latin name for appeal to authority Ad ignorantiam: Latin name for appeal to ignorance Argumentum ad baculum: Appeal to force or threats Reductio ad absurdum: Showing a claim is false by following it to an absurd result Ad nauseam: Repeating a claim until people accept it Fallacy fallacy: Assuming a conclusion is false because the argument for it is flawed Is-ought problem: Facts alone do not tell us what we should do Occam's razor: Prefer the simpler explanation that fits the facts Hume's guillotine: Another name for the is-ought gap Burden of proof: The person making a claim must support it Falsifiability: A claim should be testable and possible to prove wrong Argument from silence: Concluding something from the lack of evidence against it Fallacy of composition example: Each player is good, so the team must be good Appeal to money: Assuming something is right because it is expensive or profitable Whataboutism: Deflecting criticism by pointing to someone else's faults Free flashcards from Peabody at peabody.kids/flashcards/tp-logical-fallacies