AP LANG LOGICAL FALLACY

Ad Hominem

arguments where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself.

Hasty Generalization

someone draws a broad conclusion about a whole group or situation based on an insufficient, small, or unrepresentative sample of evidence, essentially "jumping to conclusions" without enough facts,

Slippery Slope

a course of action is rejected because the person believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. A specific decision under debate is likely to result in unintended consequences.

Either/or

a logical error where only two options are presented as the only possibilities, ignoring other potential alternatives, nuances, or middle grounds, often to manipulate a choice.

Bandwagon

a logical error where someone claims something is true, good, or right simply because it's popular or many people believe it, essentially arguing, ""Everyone else is doing it," so it must be correct"

False authority

occurs when someone cites an unqualified or irrelevant "expert" to support a claim, using their perceived authority instead of actual evidence, like a celebrity endorsing a medical product or a physicist on politics.

False causality

a logical error where someone wrongly assumes one event causes another just because they occur together or in sequence, mistaking correlation for causation without sufficient evidence.

Red Herring

a logical error where someone introduces an irrelevant topic or misleading statement to distract from the main issue in an argument, debate, or discussion, shifting focus to something superficially related but ultimately beside the point

Straw man

a logical error where someone misrepresents, exaggerates, or distorts an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack, instead of addressing the real position.

False analogy

occurs when someone argues that two things must be similar in one way because they are similar in other ways, even though the similarities are superficial and the differences are more significant, making the comparison illogical and the conclusion unsupported.

circular reasoning

an argument that assumes the very thing it is trying to prove is true. Instead of offering evidence, it simply repeats the conclusion, rendering the argument logically incoherent.

non-sequitur

a conclusion that isn't logically connected to the premises or evidence given, creating a gap in reasoning where the conclusion is irrelevant or unsupported by the preceding statements, even if the premises themselves are true.