All the Fallacies
False Dilemma
Two choices are given when in fact there are three options
Argument From Ignorance
Because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
Slippery Slope
A series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
Complex Question
Two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition
Appeal to Force
The reader is persuaded to agree by force
Appeal to Pity
The reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy
Appeal to Consequences
The reader is warned of unacceptable consequences
Prejudicial Language
Value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author
Appeal to Popularity
A proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true
Anonymous Authorities
The authority in question is not named
Coincidental Correlation
Because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
Attacking the Person
The person's character is attacked, the person's circumstances are noted, or the person does not practice what is preached
Appeal to Authority
The authority is not an expert in the field, experts in the field disagree, or the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious
(i) the person is not qualified to have an expert opinion on the subject,
ii) experts in the field disagree on this issue.
(iii) the authority was making a joke, drunk, or otherwise not being serious
A variation of the fallacious appeal to authority is hearsay. An argument from hearsay is an argument which depends on second or third hand sources.
Converse Accident
An exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply
Style Over Substance
The manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion
Unrepresentative Sample
The sample is unrepresentative of the population as a whole
Hasty Generalization
The sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population
False Analogy
The two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
Slothful Induction
The conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary
Fallacy of Exclusion
Evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration
Accident
A generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception
Joint Effect
One thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause
Genuine but Insignificant Cause
One thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect
Wrong Direction
The direction between cause and effect is reversed
Complex Cause
The cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect
Begging the Question
The truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
Irrelevant Conclusion
An argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion
Straw Man
The author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best argument
Equivocation
The same term is used with two different meanings
Amphiboly
The structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
Accent
The emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says
Composition
Because the parts have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property
Division
Because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property
Affirming the Consequent
Any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A
Denying the Antecedent
Any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B
Inconsistency
Asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true
Fallacy of Four Terms
A syllogism has four terms
Undistributed Middle
Two separate categories are said to be connected because they share a common property
Illicit Major
The predicate of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only refer to some of them.
Illicit Minor
The subject of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only refer to some of them.
Fallacy of Exclusive Premises
A syllogism has two negative premises
Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise
As the name implies
Existential Fallacy
A particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises
Subverted Support
The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist
Non-Support
Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased
Untestability
The theory that explains cannot be tested
Limited Scope
The theory that explains can only explain one thing
Limited Depth
The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes
Too Broad
The definition includes items that should not be included
Too Narrow
The definition does not include all the items that should be included
