AP Seminar - Logical Fallacies

The logical fallacies discussed in AP Seminar and expected of students to be able to identify

Strawman

You misrepresented someone's argument to make it easier to attack.

Red Herring

This is a diversionary tactic that avoids the key issues, often by avoiding opposing arguments rather than addressing them.

Loaded Question

You asked a question that had a presumption built into it so that it couldn't be answered without appearing guilty.

Slippery Slope

You said that if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen.

Ad Hominem

You attacked your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.

Ad Populum

This is an emotional appeal that speaks to positive (such as patriotism, religion, democracy) or negative (such as terrorism or fascism) concepts rather than the real issue at hand.

Bandwagon

You appealed to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation.

Hasty Generalization

This is a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence.

Begging the Question

You presented a circular argument in which the conclusion was included in the premise.

Black-or-White/Either-Or

You presented two alternative states as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.

Burden of Proof

Claiming that it is not the opponents responsibility prove or disprove a claim, but that such responsibility lies with someone else.

The Texas Sharpshooter

Cherry-picking a data cluster to suit your argument, or found a pattern to fit a presumption.

Genetic Fallacy

You judged something as either good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it came.

Personal Incredulity

Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

The Fallacy Fallacy

You presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong.

Appeal to Authority

A claim that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true.

Appeal to Nature

A claim that because something is 'natural' it is therefore valid, justified, inevitable, good or ideal.

Appeal to Emotion

A claim that attempts to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.

The Gambler's Fallacy

You said that 'runs' occur to statistically independent phenomena such as roulette wheel spins.

False Cause

You presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other.

Middle Ground

A claim that a compromise, or middle point, between two extremes must be the truth.

Ambiguity

To use a double meaning or ambiguity of language to mislead or misrepresent the truth.

No True Scotsman

To make an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument.

Tu Quoque (pronounced too-kwo-kwee)

To avoid having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.

Anecdotal

Using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.

Special Pleading

Essentially moving the goalposts or making up an exception when the claim was shown to be false. Humans are funny creatures and have a foolish aversion to being wrong.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (aka Post Hoc)

This is a conclusion that assumes that if 'A' occurred after 'B' then 'B' must have caused 'A.'

Composition/Division

The assumption that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts.

Moral Equivalence

This fallacy compares minor misdeeds with major atrocities.