A defect in a argument that consists of something other than false premises
Appeal to Force
when the arguer states a conclusion to the second arguer and tells that person implicitly or explicitly that some harm will come to them if they don't accept the conclusion
Appeal to Pity
Occurs when an arguer attempts to support a conclusion by merely evoking pity from the reader or listener.
Appeal to the People
uses desires such as love, esteem, admiration to get the reader or listener to accept the conclusion
Appeal to Vanity
Associates the product with some one who is admired, pursued, or imitates, the idea being that you will be admired too if you use it.
Appeal to Snobbery
If you accept the argument you will be cool
an argument relying on attacking the author of the argument rather than the argument itself
Ad Hominem Abusive
argument-against-the-person fallacy--arguer verbally abuses second arguer for the purpose of discrediting the argument
Ad Hominem Circumstantial
responding to an argument by trying to discredit the person who put it forward by alluding to irrelevant circumstances about the person
The second arguer attempts to make the first appear to be hypocritical or arguing in bad faith
A general rule is applied to a specific case it was not intended to cover.
An arguer distorts an opponent's argument for the purpose of more easily attacking it, demolishes the distorted argument and then concludes that the opponent's real argument has been demolished.
Missing the Point
premises of an argument support one particular conclusion, but then a different conclusion, often vaguely related to the correct conclusion is drawn.
Arguer diverts the attention of the reader or listener by changing the subject to a different but subtly related one. Finishes by either drawing a conclusion about this different issue or by merely presuming that some conclusion has been established.
Appeal to Unqualified Authority
variety of the argument from authority and occurs when the cited authority or witness lacks credibility
Appeal to Ignorance
Premises of an argument state that nothing can be proved one way or the other about something and the conclusion then makes a definite assertion about that thing.
When there is reasonable likelihood that the sample is not representative of the group
The link between the premises and conclusion depends on some imagines causal connection that probably does not exist
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Supposes that just because one event precedes another event the first even causes the second.
Non causa pro causa
argument mistakes the cause for the effect
A multitude of causes is responsible for a certain effect but the arguer selects just one of these causes and represents it as if it were the sole cause
Conclusion of an argument depends on the supposition that independent events in a game of chance are causally related
Conclusion of an argument rests on an alleged chain reaction and there is not sufficient reason to think that the chain reaction will actually take place
When the analogy is not strong enough to support the conclusion that is drawn.
Fallacy of Presumption
The premises presume what they purport to prove.
Fallacy of Ambiguity
Some form of ambiguity in either the premises or the conclusion or both
Fallacy of Grammatical Analogy
Bad arguments that are grammatically analogous to good arguments
Begging the Question
Whenever the arguer creates the illusion that inadequate premises provide adequate support for the conclusion by reasoning in a circle. Conclusion is assumed in the process of arguing for it
A disjunctive premise presents two unlikely alternatives as if they were the only ones available and the arguer then eliminates the undesirable leaving the desirable one as the conclusion
Argument that ignores an important piece of evidence that outweighs the presented evidence and entails a very different conclusion
Conclusion of an argument depends on the fact that a word or phrase is used in two different senses in the argument
Arguer misinterprets an ambiguous statement and then draws a conclusion based on this faulty interpretation
Conclusion of an argument depends on the erroneous transference of an attribute from the parts of something onto the whole
conclusion of an argument depends on the erroneous transference of an attribute from a whole onto its parts