These are the most common fallacies I see during philosophical discussions or debates on the internet. One day I hope to have learned these by heart, but until then this will serve as a reference.
Argument from Ignorance: assuming that a claim is true (or false) because it has not been proven false (true) or cannot be proven false (true). I believe in Leprechauns because no one has been able to prove they aren't real.
Begging the Question/ Circular Reasoning: where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises.
The universe has a beginning. Every thing that has a beginning has a cause. Therefore, the universe has a cause called God. (Begging the question)
This assumes that a) the universe has a beginning; and b) everything that begins requires a cause.
The Bible is true because God exists, and God exists because the Bible says so. (Circular reasoning)
Shifting the Burden of Proof: I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false. Of course leprechauns exist. Has anyone ever proven otherwise?
Circular Cause & Consequence: where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause. As ice cream sales increase, the rate of drowning deaths increases sharply. Therefore, ice cream consumption causes drowning.
Equivocation: the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time). The sign said "fine for parking here", and since it was fine, I parked there.
False Dilemma / False Dichotomy: two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more. America: Love it or leave it.
Loaded Question: someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved. This fallacy is often used rhetorically, so that the question limits direct replies to those that serve the questioner's agenda. Have you stopped beating your wife?
False Attribution: when an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument.
Moving the Goalposts: argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. This attempts to leave the impression that an argument had a fair hearing while actually reaching a preordained conclusion. Some of the stories in the Bible may not be true, but how does that prove God doesn't exist?
Post hoc: X happened then Y happened; therefore X caused Y. Roosters crow just before the sun rises. Therefore, roosters crowing cause the sun to rise.
Red Herring: a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument. I know your car isn't working right. But, if you had gone to the store one day earlier, you'd not be having problems.
Regression Fallacy: ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations and a tendency toward the mean. Speed cameras are often installed after a road incurs an exceptionally high number of accidents, and this value usually falls (regression to mean) immediately afterwards. Many speed camera proponents attribute this fall in accidents to the speed camera, without observing the overall trend.
Retrospective Determinism: the argument that because some event has occurred, its occurrence must have been inevitable beforehand. When he declared himself dictator of the Roman Republic, Julius Caesar was bound to be assassinated.
Special Pleading / Double Standard: where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption. I'm not relying on faith in small probabilities here. These are slot machines, not roulette wheels. They are different.
No true Scotsman: attempts to avoid being associated with an unpleasant act by asserting that no true member of the group they belong to would do such a thing. The 9/11 terrorists were not true Muslims.
Cherry Picking: act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.
False Analogy: the analogy is poorly suited. Clogged arteries require surgery to clear them; our clogged highways require equally drastic measures.
Ad hominem: attacking the arguer instead of the argument. Well, you're a moron and an asshole, so there goes your argument.
Poisoning the well: a type of ad hominem where adverse information about a target is presented with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says. Before you listen to my opponent, may I remind you that he has been in jail.
Appeal to Majority: where a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because many people believe it to be so. Christianity is the world's largest religion, so it must be correct.
Association Fallacy: arguing that because two things share a property they are the same. Stalin was an atheist that had millions of people killed therefore atheism is evil.
Appeal to Authority: where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it, but the person in question is not a legitimate expert. These pills must be safe and effective for losing weight. They have been endorsed by Miss X, star of stage, screen, and television.
Appeal to Emotion: where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning. I believe in the afterlife because it makes me less afraid to die.
Appeal to Tradition: a conclusion supported solely because it has long been held to be true. These rules were written 100 years ago and we have always followed them. Therefore, there is no need to change them.
Nazi Card: comparing an opponent or their argument to Hitler or Nazism in an attempt to associate a position with one that is universally reviled.
Straw Man: an argument based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. Senator Bob Smith wants to reduce military spending. He won't be happy until America is completely defenseless!
No comments:
Post a Comment