Terms : Hide Images
| 5833757059 | ad hominem: | An arguer who uses ad hominem attacks the person instead of the argument. | 0 | |
| 5833757060 | appeal to ignorance | appealing to ignorance as evidence for something. (Because we have no knowledge of alien visitors, that means they do not exist). | 1 | |
| 5833757061 | argument from omniscience: | (e.g., All people believe in something. Everyone knows that.) An arguer would need omniscience to know about everyone's beliefs or disbeliefs or about their knowledge. Beware of words like "all," "everyone," "everything," "absolute." | 2 | |
| 5833757062 | appeal to faith: | (e.g., if you have no faith, you cannot learn) if the arguer relies on faith as the basis of his argument, then you can gain little from further discussion. Faith, by definition, relies on a belief that does not rest on logic or evidence. Faith depends on irrational thought and produces intransigence. | 3 | |
| 5833757063 | appeal to tradition | (similar to the bandwagon fallacy): (e.g., astrology, religion) just because people practice a tradition, says nothing about its viability. "We've always done it that way." | 4 | |
| 5833757064 | argument from authority | (argumentum ad verecundiam): using the words of an "expert" or authority as the basis of the argument instead of using the logic or evidence that supports an argument. (e.g., Professor so-and-so believes in creation-science.) Simply because an authority makes a claim does not necessarily mean he got it right. If an arguer presents the testimony from an expert, look to see if it accompanies reason and sources of evidence behind it. | 5 | |
| 5833757065 | Appeal to consequences | (argumentum ad consequentiam): an argument that concludes a premise (usually a belief) as either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences. Example: some religious people believe that knowledge of evolution leads to immorality, therefore evolution proves false. Even if teaching evolution did lead to immorality, it would not imply a falsehood of evolution. | 6 | |
| 5833757066 | argument from adverse consequences: | (e.g., We should judge the accused as guilty, otherwise others will commit similar crimes) Just because a repugnant crime or act occurred, does not necessarily mean that a defendant committed the crime or that we should judge him guilty. (Or: disasters occur because God punishes non-believers; therefore, we should all believe in God) Just because calamities or tragedies occur, says nothing about the existence of God or that we should believe in a certain way. | 7 | |
| 5833757067 | argumentum ad baculum | (appeal to fear or threat): An argument based on an appeal to fear or a threat. (e.g., If you don't believe in God, you'll burn in hell) | 8 | |
| 5833757068 | argumentum ad ignorantiam: | A misleading argument used in reliance on people's ignorance. | 9 | |
| 5833757070 | bandwagon fallacy: | concluding that an idea has merit simply because many people believe it or practice it. Simply because many people may believe something says nothing about the fact of that something. For example, many people during the Black plague believed that demons caused disease. The number of believers say nothing at all about the cause of disease. | 10 | |
| 5833757071 | begging the question/circular reasoning: | (or assuming the answer): (e.g., We must encourage our youth to worship God to instill moral behavior.) But do religion and worship actually produce moral behavior? stating in one's proposition that which one aims to prove. (e.g. God exists because the Bible says so; the Bible exists because God influenced it.) | 11 | |
| 5914506865 | composition fallacy | when the conclusion of an argument depends on an erroneous characteristic from parts of something to the whole or vice versa. (e.g., Humans have consciousness and human bodies and brains consist of atoms; therefore, atoms have consciousness. Or: a word processor program consists of many bytes; therefore a byte forms a fraction of a word processor.) | 12 | |
| 5833757074 | confusion of correlation and causation: | (e.g., More men play chess than women, therefore, men make better chess players than women. Or: Children who watch violence on TV tend to act violently when they grow up.) But does television programming cause violence or do violence oriented children prefer to watch violent programs? Perhaps an entirely different reason creates violence not related to television at all. Stephen Jay Gould called the invalid assumption that correlation implies cause as "probably among the two or three most serious and common errors of human reasoning" (The Mismeasure of Man). | 13 | |
| 5833757075 | excluded middle (either-or) (or false dichotomy): | considering only the extremes. Many people use Aristotelian either/or logic tending to describe in terms of up/down, black/white, true/false, love/hate, etc. (e.g., You either like it or you don't. He either stands guilty or not guilty.) Many times, a continuum occurs between the extremes that people fail to see. The universe also contains many "maybes." | 14 | |
| 5833757076 | half truths (suppressed evidence): | A statement usually intended to deceive that omits some of the facts necessary for an accurate description. | 15 | |
| 5833757077 | loaded questions: | embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?) | 16 | |
| 5833757080 | non sequitur: | Latin for "It does not follow." An inference or conclusion that does not follow from established premises or evidence. (e.g., there occured an increase of births during the full moon. Conclusion: full moons cause birth rates to rise.) But does a full moon actually cause more births, or did it occur for other reasons, perhaps from expected statistical variations? | 17 | |
| 5833757083 | post hoc, ergo propter hoc: | Latin for "It happened after, so it was caused by." Similar to a non sequitur, but time dependent. (e.g. She got sick after she visited China, so something in China caused her sickness.) Perhaps her sickness derived from something entirely independent from China. | 18 | |
| 5833757085 | red herring: | when the arguer diverts the attention by changing the subject. | 19 | |
| 5833757087 | slippery slope: | a change in procedure, law, or action, will result in adverse consequences. (e.g., If we allow doctor assisted suicide, then eventually the government will control how we die.) It does not necessarily follow that just because we make changes that a slippery slope will occur. | 20 | |
| 5833757090 | straw man: | creating a false or made up scenario and then attacking it. (e.g., Evolutionists think that everything came about by random chance.) Most evolutionists think in terms of natural selection which may involve incidental elements, but does not depend entirely on random chance. Painting your opponent with false colors only deflects the purpose of the argument. (From the email that I get on NoBeliefs.com this appears as the most common fallacy of all.) | 21 | |
| 5833757091 | two wrongs make a right: | trying to justify what we did by accusing someone else of doing the same. (e.g. how can you judge my actions when you do exactly the same thing?) The guilt of the accuser has no relevance to the discussion. | 22 |
