Because two things happen at the same time, it is wrongly assumed that one is the cause of the other.
"Post Hoc" is Latin for "after this." One thing happens, then another. It is then claimed that the first event caused the second.
A person believes in a certain proposition. He then looks for examples that will support his belief. He selects only those examples or instances that back up his belief while ignoring examples that contradict his belief. He tries to persuade you by giving you only his selected examples.
A person jumps to a conclusion based on only a few examples. Unlike Selected Instances, the person has no preconceived belief. Instead, after seeing only a few examples, he draws a conclusion.
This false reasoning says that, because two or more things are alike in one way, they must be alike in some other way. The reasoning is valid if the way the things are alike has some bearing on the other aspect. If the similarity of the two persons or things really has no connection to the conclusion, the analogy is faulty.
Because each of the individual parts of a collective unit (a machine, group of people, etc.) has a certain good quality, then the entire unit is said to have that same quality. In other words, if the parts are good, the whole must be good (or bad).
This is the opposite of Composition. This technique says that, if the whole is good (or bad), each part must be good (or bad).
"Non sequitur" is Latin for "does not follow." This means the conclusion is not justified by the given statements (premises). Therefore, this is a "catch-all" category. If an example does not fit into any other category, it is probably Non Sequitur.