common logical fallacies review

Appeal to common practice

Fallacy that occurs when someone claims that since it everyone does it, it is morally okay and acceptable to do

Appeal to common practice vs. appeal to tradition

Tradition focuses on longevity and history (it has always been done), common practice focuses on trends and the widespread nature

Appeal to novelty

Fallacy that occurs when someone argues that something else is better than another thing because it is newer.

Misleading vividness

Instead of reasonable evidence, dramatic/outlying examples are used to come to a conclusion.

Gambler's fallacy

Past independent event will effect future independent event. EX. ) Coin flip

Sunk Cost fallacy

Refusal to abandon something because of the amount of invested time

Flattery

To use flattery as a way to persuade someone into another belief, when the flattery does not correlate with the belief

Ad hominem circumstantial

Diverting attention away from argument by presenting a personal, irrelevant attack on the other person circumstance/situation ("you're only saying that because....!")

Ad hominem circumstantial vs. poisoning the well

Ad hominem circumstantial uses irrelevant attack anywhere in the argument, poisoning the well occurs when someone attacks the other person before the argument, leading to lost credibility.

Tu quoque (you too)

Fallacy occurs when speaker performs action they are criticizing other person for

Ad feminem

Attacks someone based on their gender (female)

Two wrongs make a right

Believing an action is justified because someone else did it

Appeal to spite

Replacing evidence with something people dislike to make them against the initial claim

Texas sharpshooter

Specifically specific data that supports argument, ignoring counter argument, while falsely implying a pattern exists when there isn't

Burden of proof

Making a claim without providing evidence, but rather telling opposition to prove it wrong

Burden of proof vs. circular reasoning

Burden of proof doesn't use evidence, circular reasoning uses its claim as its own evidence

Cherry picking

Only chooses evidence when it strongly supports argument

Cherry picking vs. texas sharpshooter

Texas sharpshooter tries to connect random occurrences to form a pattern, while cherry picking chooses specific evidence.

Equivocation

Unclear answer when you are given a question (convolution)

Middle ground

When someone assumes solution lies between two opposite extremes, a compromise that satisfies both parties

No true scotsman

The fallacy occurs when, instead of presenting evidence, the arguer claims people of a certain group act or look a certain way and that if they do not act or look that way, then they are not true members of the group

Perfect solution/nirvana

When a realistic solution is rejected because it isn't seamless/faultless

Biased Sample

Making a claim based on data that isn't representative of the population

Biased sample vs. hasty generalization

Biased sample is more about accuracy about a group. Hasty generalization is about the size of the group.

Appeal to fear

The use of fear during an argument to try to win the argument

Slippery slope

When a person claims that one negative decision will trigger a negative chain of events

Guilt by association

When someone is viewed negatively based on their relationship with another person/group with a bad reputation

Genetic fallacy

Rejecting or accepting an argument based on what/who the source is (not actual genetics)

Poisoning the well

Discrediting someone before the argument begins

Ignoring common cause

When someone claims that one event caused another, disregarding other factors

Confusing cause and effect

Mistakenly claims that event caused another event when it's the opposite OR the relationship is more complex than cause and effect

Appeal to pity

People supporting their claim by evoking feelings of guilt rather than solid evidence