Logical Fallacies

List of logical fallacies - source:yourlogicalfallacyis.com

strawman - you misrepresent someone's argument to make it easier to attack

false cause - you presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other

appeal to emotion - you attempted to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument

ad hominem - you attacked your opponen's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument

tu quoque - you avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism

personal incredulity - because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true

special pleading - you moved the goalposts or made up an exception when your claim was shown to be false

loaded question - you asked a question that had a presumption built into it so that it couldn't be answered without appearing guilty

burden of proof - you said that the burden of proof lies not with the person making the claim, but with someone else to disprove

ambiguity - you used a double meaning or ambiguity of language to mislead or misrepresent the truth

the gambler's fallacy - you said that 'runs' occur to statistically independent phenomena such as roulette wheel spins

bandwagon- you appealed to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation

appeal to authority - you said that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true

composition/division - you assumed that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other parts of it; or that what is true of the whole must also be true of the parts

no true scotsman - you made what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument

genetic - you judged something as either good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it came

black-or-white - you presented two alternative states as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist

begging the question - you presented a circular argument in which the conclusiom was included in the premise 

appeal to nature - you argued that because something is 'natural' it is therefore valid, justified, inevtable, good or ideal 

anecdotal - you used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence

the texas sharpshooter - You cherry-picked a data cluster to suit your argument, or found a pattern to fit a presumption

middle ground - you claimed that a comppromise, or middle point between two extremes must be the truth

strawman - you misrepresented someone's argument to make it easier to attack

false cause - you presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other

appeal to emotion - you attempted to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argumwnt

the fallacy fallacy - you presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong

slippery slope - you said if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen