Logical Fallacies

Fallacy of Accident occurs when a general rule is applied mechanically to a situation where exceptional circumstances make the rule inappropriate or invalid.

Ad Hoc Rescue is a fallacy in which a theory, belief, or claim is protected from falsification by introducing a new, untested, or contrived explanation after contrary evidence appears.

Ad Hominem is a fallacy in which an argument is attacked by targeting the person making it rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself.

The Anecdotal Fallacy occurs when personal experience or isolated examples are used as decisive evidence instead of reliable data or systematic analysis.

Argument from Silence is a fallacy in which the absence of evidence or mention is treated as evidence that something is false, true, or did not occur.

Appeal to Authority is a fallacy where a claim is accepted as true simply because it is endorsed by an authority figure or expert.

Appeal to Common Practice argues that an action or belief is correct, acceptable, or justified because many people engage in it.

Appeal to Emotion is a fallacy in which emotions are used to persuade instead of logical reasons or evidence.

Appeal to Fear is a fallacy in which an argument attempts to persuade by arousing fear rather than providing relevant evidence or logical reasons.

Appeal to Flattery is a fallacy in which praise or admiration is used to persuade someone instead of providing valid reasons.

Appeal to Nature is a fallacy that argues something is good, right, or better simply because it is natural.

Appeal to Pity is a fallacy in which someone attempts to persuade others by eliciting sympathy or compassion instead of providing relevant reasons or evidence.

Appeal to Probability is a fallacy that assumes because something is possible or likely, it will inevitably happen.

Appeal to Ridicule is a fallacy in which an argument is dismissed by mocking, joking about, or belittling it rather than addressing its substance.

Appeal to Spite is a fallacy in which a position is supported or opposed primarily out of resentment, hostility, or a desire to harm someone else.

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that argues something is right, correct, or justified simply because it has been done that way for a long time.

Argument from Ignorance is a fallacy in which a claim is considered true or false simply because it has not been proven otherwise.

Association Fallacy occurs when a person, idea, or claim is judged based on its association with another person or group rather than on its own merits.

The Availability Heuristic is a reasoning error in which the likelihood or frequency of an event is judged based on how easily examples come to mind.

Bandwagon Fallacy is a fallacy in which a claim is considered true or acceptable because many people believe or support it.

Begging the Question is a fallacy in which a conclusion is assumed in the premises instead of being supported by them.

Biased Sample is a fallacy in which conclusions are drawn from a sample that is not representative of the overall population.

Broken Window Fallacy is an economic fallacy that assumes destruction or loss creates economic benefit by generating activity.

Burden of Proof Fallacy occurs when someone shifts the responsibility of providing evidence for a claim onto others instead of supporting it themselves.

Cherry Picking is a fallacy in which only evidence that supports a claim is selected, while evidence that contradicts it is ignored.

Circular Reasoning is a fallacy in which a conclusion is supported by premises that assume the conclusion itself.

Composition Fallacy occurs when it is assumed that what is true of individual parts must also be true of the whole.

Confirmation Bias is a cognitive bias in which people favor information that supports their existing beliefs while ignoring or discounting contrary evidence.

Confusing Cause and Effect is a fallacy in which the direction of causation is mistaken or reversed.

Continuum Fallacy occurs when it is argued that because there is no clear boundary between two extremes, a meaningful distinction between them does not exist.

Denial of the Antecedent is a logical fallacy in which it is assumed that if the antecedent of a conditional statement is false, then the consequent must also be false.

Division Fallacy occurs when it is assumed that what is true of a whole must also be true of its individual parts.

Double Counting is a fallacy in which the same factor or piece of evidence is counted more than once when evaluating an argument or outcome.

Double Standard is a fallacy in which the same situation is judged by different standards without relevant justification.

Ecological Fallacy occurs when conclusions about individuals are drawn from statistical data about groups.

Equivocation is a fallacy in which a key word or phrase is used with different meanings within the same argument.

Etymological Fallacy occurs when the original or historical meaning of a word is assumed to determine its current meaning.

False Analogy is a fallacy in which an argument is based on a comparison between two things that are not sufficiently similar in relevant aspects.

False Attribution is a fallacy in which responsibility, intent, or causation is incorrectly assigned to a person or factor.

False Authority is a fallacy in which a claim is supported by citing an authority who is not qualified, relevant, or reliable in the given context.

False Balance is a fallacy in which two sides of an issue are presented as equally valid or supported, even when the evidence strongly favors one side.

False Cause is a fallacy in which a causal relationship is assumed without sufficient evidence, often based on coincidence or sequence.

False Consensus Effect is a bias in which people overestimate how widely their beliefs, opinions, or behaviors are shared by others.

False Dilemma is a fallacy that presents a limited set of options as if they were the only possible outcomes.

False Equivalence is a fallacy in which two things are presented as morally, logically, or factually equivalent despite significant differences.

False Precision is a fallacy in which overly specific or exact figures are used to suggest a level of accuracy that is not justified by the available data.

False Premise is a fallacy in which an argument is built on an assumption that is false, unsupported, or unjustified.

Genetic Fallacy is a fallacy in which a claim is judged as true or false based on its origin rather than its actual merits.

Gish Gallop is a fallacy in which a large number of arguments, claims, or points are presented rapidly to overwhelm an opponent, regardless of their accuracy.

Guilt by Association is a fallacy in which a person or idea is judged negatively based on its association with someone or something viewed unfavorably.

Hasty Generalization is a fallacy in which a broad conclusion is drawn from an insufficient or unrepresentative sample.

Historian’s Fallacy occurs when past events or decisions are judged as if historical actors knew information that was only available later.

Incomplete Comparison is a fallacy in which two or more things are compared without specifying the relevant criteria or dimensions of comparison.

Intentional Fallacy is a fallacy in which a work’s meaning or value is judged solely by the author’s intended meaning rather than the text or work itself.

Just-World Fallacy is a fallacy in which people assume that the world is fundamentally fair, so individuals get what they deserve.

Kettle Logic is a fallacy in which multiple, inconsistent arguments are used simultaneously to defend a position.

Loaded Question is a fallacy in which a question contains an unjustified or controversial assumption that traps the respondent.

Ludic Fallacy is a fallacy in which real-world uncertainty and complexity are underestimated by relying on simplified models, games, or tidy statistical assumptions.

McNamara Fallacy is a fallacy in which decision-making relies exclusively on quantitative metrics while ignoring qualitative factors that are difficult to measure.

Middle Ground Fallacy is a fallacy in which it is assumed that a compromise between two opposing positions must be correct or preferable.

Moralistic Fallacy is a fallacy in which it is assumed that because something would be morally desirable, it must be true or must occur in reality.

Moving the Goalposts is a fallacy in which the criteria for success are changed after they have been met, in order to dismiss evidence or avoid conceding a point.

Naturalistic Fallacy is a fallacy in which it is assumed that what is natural is inherently good, right, or morally acceptable.

No True Scotsman is a fallacy in which a universal claim is protected from counterexamples by redefining a group to exclude inconvenient cases.

Nirvana Fallacy is a fallacy in which realistic solutions are rejected because they are not perfect.

Observer-Expectancy Effect is a bias in which a researcher’s or observer’s expectations influence the outcome of an observation or experiment.

Oversimplification is a fallacy in which a complex issue, system, or problem is reduced to an overly simple explanation that ignores important details or factors.

Pathetic Fallacy is a fallacy in which human emotions, intentions, or characteristics are attributed to inanimate objects, animals, or abstract concepts.

Personal Incredulity is a fallacy in which a claim is rejected because an individual finds it difficult to understand or believe.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc is a fallacy in which it is assumed that because one event occurred after another, the first event caused the second.

Prosecutor’s Fallacy is a fallacy in which the probability of observing evidence if a defendant is innocent is confused with the probability that the defendant is innocent given the evidence.

Questionable Cause is a fallacy in which a causal relationship is asserted without sufficient evidence, often relying on weak correlation or coincidence.

Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is introduced to distract attention from the original issue.

Regression Fallacy is a fallacy in which natural statistical regression toward the average is mistaken for a causal effect.

Regression to the Mean Fallacy occurs when normal statistical movement toward average outcomes is interpreted as the result of a specific cause.

Reification is a fallacy in which an abstract concept, process, or category is treated as if it were a concrete, independent entity.

Relative Privation is a fallacy in which a problem is dismissed because there are other problems that are perceived as more serious.

Sharpshooter Fallacy is a fallacy in which data is interpreted by focusing on patterns that appear after the fact, while ignoring random variation.

Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which it is argued that a relatively small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of extreme or undesirable outcomes.

Special Pleading is a fallacy in which exceptions are made for a claim or position without proper justification, often to protect it from criticism.

Spotlight Fallacy is a bias in which people overestimate how much others notice or focus on their actions, appearance, or mistakes.

Straw Man is a fallacy in which an opponent’s argument is misrepresented, exaggerated, or oversimplified in order to make it easier to attack.

Suppressed Evidence is a fallacy in which relevant information is deliberately ignored or omitted because it weakens the argument.

Survivorship Bias is a fallacy in which conclusions are drawn from only the cases that succeeded, while failures are ignored.

Tu Quoque is a fallacy in which criticism is dismissed by accusing the critic of similar or related wrongdoing.

Undistributed Middle is a fallacy in which two things are incorrectly assumed to be related because they share a common attribute.

Weak Analogy is a fallacy in which an argument relies on a comparison between two things that are not sufficiently similar in relevant respects.

Wishful Thinking is a fallacy in which beliefs are formed or conclusions are drawn based on what one wants to be true rather than on evidence.