Fallacies

The false belief that one's argument is right because his opponent cannot refute it.

Ad ignorantiam

One of several valid formal arguments is known as modus ponens (the mode of affirming) and takes the following form: If A then C, A; hence C. A is called the antecedent and C the consequent, and they form two premises and a conclusion.

Affirming the consequent

This fallacy plays on the fears of an audience by imagining a scary future that would be of their making if some proposition were accepted. This fallacy is close to argument from consequences as well as the "slippery slope" fallacy.

Appeal to Fear (emotional)

Also in Latin: tu quoque, meaning "you too". This fallacy involves countering someone's argument by pointing out that it conflicts with his or her own past actions or statements.

Appeal to Hypocrisy

This kind of argument assumes a proposition to be true simply because there is no evidence proving that it is false. Hence, absence of evidence is taken to be evidence of absence.

Appeal to Ignorance (informal)

The appeal to one who is not an expert on the issue at hand. A similar worth nothing is the appeal to vague authority, where an idea is attribute to a faceless collective.

Appeal to irrelevant authority:

Speaking for or against a truth of a statement by appealing to the consequence it would have if true (or false)

Argument from consequence:

Pilling up data with no apparent argument. Data by itself does not make an argument or proposition to be analyzed.

Baconian fallacy:

To argue that one is correct because you cannot prove otherwise

Bandwagon Appeal

When one's argument is based on the point that he is attempting to prove

Begging the question

Exploits the ambiguity of language by changing the meaning of a word during the course of an argument and using the different meaning to support an ill-founded conclusion.

Equivocation:

An argument that presents a limited set of two possible categories and assumes that everything in the scope of the discussion must be an element of that set. Thus, by rejecting one category, you are forced to accept the other. Some dilemmas are true or readily apparent, but in this case, the dilemma is false. This fallacy is also called the fallacy of the excluded middle or false dichotomy.

False Dilemma (informal)

is committed when an argument is either devalued or defended solely because of its origins.

Genetic Fallacy

is used to discredit an argument for proposing an idea that is shared by some socially demonized individual or group.

Guilt by Association

This fallacy is committed when one forms a conclusion from a sample that is either too small or too special to be representative.

Hasty Generalization (informal)

When one can claim to know with certainty what might have happened if circumstances had been different.

Hypothesis contrary to fact

This argument comes up after someone has made a general claim about a group of things, and then been presented with evidence challenging that claim. Rather than revising their position, or contesting the evidence, they dodge the challenge by arbitrarily redefining the criteria for membership in that group.

No True Scotsman

It does not fellow

Non-sequitor:

This fallacy assumes a cause for an event where there is no evidence that one exists.

Not a cause for a cause (informal)

Results from the false belief that one event necessarily causes another.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc

Attempts to discredit a proposition by arguing that its acceptance will undoubtedly lead to a sequence of events, one or more of which are undesirable

Slippery Slope

In terms of practicing history (using proper historical methods) the fallacy of sole causation occurs when an historian defines what in truth are typically a myriad of causes for the occurrence of an event or set of events as one cause. Example: (bad question) What was the cause of the American Revolution? Response: this question makes use of the sole causation fallacy; assuming that there is one cause for the American Revolution. Well (bad question) just boil it down to one primary cause. I'm sorry, there were many, many causes.

Sole Causation (historical fallacy)

To intentionally caricature a person's argument with the attacking the caricature rater than the actual argument. Misrepresenting, misquoting, oversimplifying an opponent's position are all means by which one can commit the fallacy.

Straw man