hind fallacies

from spreadsheet

ad hominem

attacking a person's character

straw man

distorts or exaggerates an opponent's argument

hasty generalization

forming a conclusion with little evidence

appeal to authority

claiming something is right because an authority figure said so

appeal to false authority

attempts to prove a point by using an opinion of someone who isn't an expert in that topic

post hoc ergo propter hoc/causal fallacy

assuming that because event b happened after event a, event a caused event b

false cause

mistaking that because two things happen together or in sequence, one causes the other

slippery slope

claiming that one action will domino into worse situations

bandwagon/ad populum

thinking something is true because it is popular

false equivalence

treating two different things the same because they have one similarity

appeal to emotion

using strong emotions instead of evidence to win an argument

appeal to fear

using threats and dread instead of evidence

cherry picking/suppressed emotions

presenting data that only supports their claim while ignoring data that contradicts

loaded question

trick question that forces a person to admit guilt/defeat whether they answer with a yes or no

burden of proof

makes a claim without evidence and demands the opponent to disprove it

circular argument/circular reasoning/begging the reason

an argument's conclusion is being used as its reasoning/proof

oversimplification

watering down a complex problem to a simple factor that ignores relevant nuances

red herring

a piece of information that deflects attention away from the main issue

appeal to tradition

assuming that something is correct because it always has been

appeal to pity

trying to win support by evoking sympathy/guilt

texas sharpshooter

viewing a random cluster of data as meaningful while ignoring contradictions

no true scotsman

defending a general claim by changing its definition to exclude any exceptions (ex. no REAL patriots support this candidate)

equivocation/ambiguity

changing a word or phrase's meaning halfway throughout an argument to make it seem correct (noisy children are a headache, aspirin can get rid of headaches, aspirin gets rid of noisy children | headache is originally used figuratively but then is used literally)

tu quoque/appeal to hypocrisy

discrediting the opponent by accusing them of the same offense/acting hypocritical

appeal to ignorance/argument from ignorance

claiming a statement is true because no one has proved it as false and vice versa

special pleading

applying a standard to everyone but themselves, "double standards"

moral equivalence

claiming that two very different actions are morally equal even if they have differences in impact, scale, intent, etc.

genetic fallacy

judging an idea because of who it came from

poisoning the well

information made to discredit an opponent's future arguments is shared before they get the chance to speak

appeal to consequences

claiming an idea is true/false because its results are good/bad

middle ground fallacy

believing that the best solution is being right at the middle/thinking both sides are partially wrong

gambler's fallacy

if a random event happens more often, it will happen less in the future (and vice versa)

composition fallacy

assuming that what's true for a part must be true to the whole

division fallacy

assuming that what's true for a whole must be true to every individual part

fallacy fallacy

assuming that if an argument has a logical mistake, it is immediately false

appeal to nature

claiming that something is good because it is natural or something is bad because it is artificial