AP Lang Argument Terms: Fallacies and Logical Errors

Ad Hominem

Attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself.

Straw Man

Misrepresenting or oversimplifying someone's argument to make it easier to attack.

Slippery Slope

Arguing that a small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related (and usually negative) events.

False Dichotomy

Presenting only two options when more exist, forcing a choice between extremes.

Appeal to Authority

Asserting that a claim is true simply because an authority figure believes it, without further evidence.

Begging the Question

Assuming the conclusion within the premise, creating circular reasoning.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Assuming that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second.

Hasty Generalization

Making a broad claim based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.

Red Herring

Introducing irrelevant information to distract from the main issue.

Bandwagon

Arguing that something is true or right because it is popular or widely accepted.

Appeal to Emotion

Manipulating emotional responses instead of presenting logical arguments.

Tu Quoque (You Too)

Dismissing someone's argument by pointing out their hypocrisy rather than addressing the argument itself.

False Cause

Assuming that correlation implies causation without sufficient evidence.

No True Scotsman

Making a claim about a group and then dismissing counterexamples by redefining the group.

Cherry Picking

Selecting only evidence that supports a claim while ignoring evidence that contradicts it.

Appeal to Ignorance

Claiming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false, or vice versa.

Composition Fallacy

Assuming that what is true for individual parts is also true for the whole.

Division Fallacy

Assuming that what is true for the whole must also be true for its individual parts.

Gambler's Fallacy

Believing that past events affect the probabilities in random events, like assuming a coin flip is 'due' to land a certain way.

False Analogy

Making a misleading comparison between two things that are not sufficiently similar.

Anecdotal Evidence

Using personal stories or isolated examples instead of sound reasoning or compelling evidence.

Appeal to Tradition

Arguing that something is better or correct simply because it is traditional or has always been done that way.

Middle Ground Fallacy

Assuming that the middle position between two extremes is always the correct one.

Loaded Question

Asking a question that contains a controversial assumption, making it difficult to answer without appearing guilty or wrong.

No Fallacy Fallacy

Arguing that because a fallacy has been identified in an argument, the entire argument is invalid, disregarding valid points.

Scare Tactics

Using fear as a primary motivator to persuade an audience instead of logical reasoning.

Special Pleading

Applying standards, principles, or rules to other people or circumstances while making oneself or certain circumstances exempt.

Fallacy of Sunk Costs

Continuing a behavior or endeavor due to previously invested resources (time, money, effort) rather than future benefits.

Vagueness Fallacy

Using ambiguous or unclear language that lacks precision, leading to confusion.

False Equivalence

Drawing an equivalence between two things based on flawed reasoning or superficial similarities.

Wishful Thinking

Assuming that something is true simply because one wants it to be true, rather than relying on evidence.

Causal Fallacy

Mistaking correlation for causation, suggesting that because two things occur together, one causes the other.

Argument from Consequences

Judging the validity of an argument based on its potential consequences rather than its merit.

False Balance

Presenting two sides of an argument as equal when one side is significantly more valid or supported by evidence.

Affectation

Using overly complex language or jargon to impress rather than clarify, often leading to misunderstanding.

Inconsistency Fallacy

Making contradictory statements in an argument, undermining its credibility.

Moralistic Fallacy

Assuming that because something should be the case morally, it is the case in reality.

Appeal to Nature

Arguing that something is good or valid simply because it is natural or occurs in nature.

Cultural Fallacy

Assuming that a belief or behavior is acceptable simply because it is prevalent in a certain culture.

Self-Contradiction

Making an argument that contradicts itself, rendering it logically invalid.

Scapegoating

Blaming a person or group for problems not caused by them to distract from the real issues.

Cherry-Picking Data

Selectively presenting only the data that supports one's argument while ignoring contrary evidence.

Appeal to Common Sense

Relying on what is commonly believed or considered 'common sense' without substantial evidence.

Fallacy of Moderation

Assuming that the middle ground between two extremes is always the best or correct position.

Argument from Silence

Drawing a conclusion based on the absence of evidence rather than the presence of evidence.

Argumentum ad Populum

Arguing that a proposition is true because many people believe it to be true (appeal to popularity).

Genetic Fallacy

Judging something as either good or bad based on its origin rather than its current context or merits.

Circular Reasoning

Using the conclusion of an argument as one of the premises to support that conclusion, creating a loop.

Exaggeration

Amplifying a situation to make it seem worse or better than it actually is to persuade others.

False Attribution

Citing a source that is misrepresented or not credible to lend weight to an argument.

Quasi-Argument

Presenting an argument that lacks logical coherence but is phrased as if it were valid.

Overgeneralization

Making sweeping statements based on limited evidence or experiences.

False Cause and Effect

Confusing the direction of a causal relationship, implying that A causes B without justification.

Argument from Incredulity

Dismissing a claim as false because it seems unbelievable or implausible to the speaker.

Appeal to Fear

Using fear to influence others' decisions rather than presenting factual evidence.

Moral Equivalence

Suggesting that two actions or situations are equivalent in morality, when they may not be.

Non Sequitur

Making a conclusion that does not logically follow from the premises or arguments presented.

Dichotomous Thinking

Viewing situations in black-and-white terms, without recognizing the complexity or middle ground.

False Consensus Effect

Assuming that one's beliefs or opinions are more widely shared than they actually are.

Appeal to Pity (Ad Misericordiam)

Trying to win support for an argument by appealing to emotions of pity or compassion instead of relevant evidence.

Sunk Cost Fallacy

Continuing an endeavor due to previously invested resources (time, money, effort) rather than future benefits.

Furtive Fallacy

Assuming that because something is not well known or understood, it must be false or incorrect.

Argument from Repetition (Ad Nauseam)

Assuming that if something is repeated often enough, it must be true.

Anecdotal Fallacy

Relying on personal experiences or isolated examples rather than sound reasoning or compelling evidence.

Argument from Authority (Ad Verecundiam)

Citing an authority figure as evidence, but the authority may not be an expert in the relevant field.

Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle

A syllogism that assumes a relationship between two terms based on a shared middle term without establishing that relationship.

Overfitting

Creating an overly complex model that describes a random error or noise instead of the underlying relationship.

Causal Reductionism

Simplifying complex causal relationships to a single cause without acknowledging multiple factors.

Distraction Fallacy

Introducing irrelevant information to divert attention from the main argument or issue.

Irrelevant Conclusion (Ignoratio Elenchi)

Presenting an argument that may in itself be valid but does not address the issue at hand.

Misleading Statistics

Using statistics in a way that misrepresents the truth, either through manipulation or selective presentation.

Fallacy of Exclusivity

Assuming that two options are mutually exclusive when they may not be.

Quantitative Fallacy

Misusing numerical data or statistics to make misleading conclusions.

False Moderation

Assuming that a compromise between two opposing views is the best solution without evaluating its merits.

Argument from Intimidation

Using threats or intimidation to influence someone's beliefs or actions instead of rational argumentation.

Fallacy of Composition

Assuming that what is true for individual parts must also be true for the whole.

The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

Focusing on similarities in data while ignoring differences, often leading to misleading conclusions.

Appeal to Consequences of Belief

Arguing that a belief is true or false based on the consequences of believing it rather than on evidence.

Argument from Spurious Correlation

Concluding that two variables are related simply because they occur together, without evidence of a causal relationship.

The Nirvana Fallacy

Dismissing a solution because it is not perfect, ignoring the fact that it may still be the best available option.

Argumentum ad Nauseam

Repeatedly asserting a claim to persuade others without providing evidence, leading to its acceptance as true.

Vicious Circle

Assuming the conclusion in the premise while trying to prove it, resulting in circular reasoning.

Hasty Induction

Making a broad generalization based on an insufficient sample size or isolated incidents.

Doubtful Cause

Assuming that a cause-and-effect relationship exists when it does not, often due to anecdotal evidence.

Counterfactual Fallacy

Judging the validity of a claim based on hypothetical scenarios rather than the actual evidence.

Self-Serving Bias

Interpreting evidence or events in a way that serves one's own interests or beliefs.

Appeal to Tradition (Ad Antiquitatem)

Arguing that something is better or more valid because it has been practiced for a long time.

Misericordia Fallacy

Relying on sympathy or pity rather than rational argumentation to support a claim.