Fallacies of Distraction False Dilemma: two choices are given when in fact there are three options From Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false Slippery Slope: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn Complex Question: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition Appeals to Motives in Place of Support Appeal to Force: the reader is persuaded to agree by force Appeal to Pity: the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy Consequences: the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences Prejudicial Language:value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author Popularity: a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true Changing the Subject Attacking the Person: (1) the person's character is attacked (2) the person's circumstances are noted (3) the person does not practise what is preached Appeal to Authority: (1) the authority is not an expert in the field (2) experts in the field disagree (3) the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious Anonymous Authority: the authority in question is not named Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion Inductive Fallacies Hasty Generalization: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population Unrepresentative Sample: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar Slothful Induction: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception Converse Accident : an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply Causal Fallacies Post Hoc: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other Joint effect: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause Insignificant: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect Wrong Direction: the direction between cause and effect is reversed Complex Cause: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect Missing the Point Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises Irrelevant Conclusion: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best argument Fallacies of Ambiguity Equivocation: the same term is used with two different meanings Amphiboly: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations Accent: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says Category Errors Composition: because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property Division: because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property Non Sequitur Affirming the Consequent: any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A Denying the Antecedent: any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true Syllogistic Errors Fallacy of Four Terms: a syllogism has four terms Undistributed Middle: two separate categories are said to be connected because they share a common property Illicit Major: the predicate of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the predicate Illicit Minor: the subject of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the subject Fallacy of Exclusive Premises: a syllogism has two negative premises Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise: as the name implies Existential Fallacy: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises Fallacies of Explanation Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist) Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased) Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested) Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing) Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes) Fallacies of Definition Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included) Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included) Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand than the word or concept being defined) Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition) Conflicting Conditions (The definition is self-contradictory)
Very nice, spookz. I'm making this a sticky thread if you don't mind. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
<li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html">Ad Hominem</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem-tu-quoque.html">Ad Hominem Tu Quoque</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html">Appeal to Authority</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-belief.html">Appeal to Belief</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-common-practice.html">Appeal to Common Practice</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-consequences.html">Appeal to Consequences of a Belief</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-emotion.html">Appeal to Emotion</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-fear.html">Appeal to Fear</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-flattery.html">Appeal to Flattery</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-novelty.html">Appeal to Novelty</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-pity.html">Appeal to Pity</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html">Appeal to Popularity</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html">Appeal to Ridicule</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-spite.html">Appeal to Spite</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-tradition.html">Appeal to Tradition</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/bandwagon.html">Bandwagon</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html">Begging the Question</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-sample.html">Biased Sample</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html">Burden of Proof</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/circumstantial-ad-hominem.html">Circumstantial Ad Hominem</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/composition.html">Composition</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/confusing-cause-and-effect.html">Confusing Cause and Effect</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/division.html">Division</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/false-dilemma.html">False Dilemma</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/gamblers-fallacy.html">Gambler's Fallacy</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/genetic-fallacy.html">Genetic Fallacy</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html">Guilt By Association</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/hasty-generalization.html">Hasty Generalization</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ignoring-a-common-cause.html">Ignoring A Common Cause</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/middle-ground.html">Middle Ground</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/misleading-vividness.html">Misleading Vividness</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/personal-attack.html">Personal Attack</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/poisoning-the-well.html">Poisoning the Well</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/post-hoc.html">Post Hoc</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/questionable-cause.html">Questionable Cause</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html">Red Herring</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/relativist-fallacy.html">Relativist Fallacy</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html">Slippery Slope</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/special-pleading.html">Special Pleading</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/spotlight.html">Spotlight</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html">Straw Man</a> <li><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/two-wrongs-make-a-right.html">Two Wrongs Make A Right</a>
Another nice skeptic site at.. http://skepdic.com/ Has got some fallacies there as well, together with nice explanations.
fallacies....(?) is that like a limp penis?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :bugeye: (chuckle chuckle chuckle)
Conversational Terrorism Ad Hominem Variants OVER YOUR HEAD: [*]"I'd like to respond to that, but taking into account your background, education, and intelligence, I am quite sure that you would not be able to understand." EVEN YOU: [*]"My next point will be so cogent that even you will be able to understand it." [*]"Even you should be able to grasp the next point." YOU'LL GET OVER IT: [*]"I used to think that way when I was your age." [*]"As you mature emotionally (or mentally, or spiritually), you will grow out of your present way of thinking, and you will eventually come around to my point of view." [*]"You're new here, aren't you?" WISHFUL THINKING: [*]"You support capital punishment because of a deep-rooted death wish common among those who have suffered emotional traumas during childhood." [*]"You oppose capital punishment because of an irrational suppressed death taboo common among those who have suffered emotional trauma during childhood." [*]"You weren't breast fed as a child, were you?" Sleight of Mind Fallacies NIT-PICKING: [*]"We need to define just exactly what you mean by _________." [*]"Your last sentence ended with a preposition. Please restate it properly." RIGHT BY ASSOCIATION: [*]"I have observed that those who disagree with me on the next point tend to be unsophisticated, and those who quickly recognize the validity of the point to be more educated. The point is...." [*]"Of course there is a lot of debate on this subject, but the best scholars believe..." LUNATIC FRINGE: [*]"So you think we ought to just throw out the whole system, then?" [*]"How is that different from classic fascism?" [*]"So you would just like to kill off anyone who disagrees with you, it appears!" CUT 'EM OFF AT THE PASS: [*]"I don't think we can go on until we establish the scientific validity of that last statement." [*]"I don't see any point in discussing this until all the data are in." DENIAL OF A VALID CONCLUSION: [*]"I don't see how you figure that." [*]"I agree with everything you said except the conclusion. It doesn't make any sense to me, and I can not accept it. I am trying, but your brain must work much differently than mine." Delay Tactics DESCRIBE THE ANSWER: [*]"I think the answer to your last question will clear up your confusion on this subject. (Long pause) Are you ready?" [*]"Excellent question, and I think the answer will startle you." (Pause, look thoughtfully as if a response is due while thinking up an answer.) [*]"I'm glad you asked. Would you like a long or a short answer?" DESCRIBE THE QUESTION: [*]"This question could only come from the confusion of the ______ mind-set." [*]"That is an interesting question coming from you. Interesting, interesting, interesting." (Pause, as if admiring the other person. ) [*]"The question asked, is basically _______, ________, _______." (Restate the questions in various ways, pausing for approval between each, while thinking up an answer.) QUESTION THE QUESTION / COMMENT: [*]"Why do you ask that?" / "What makes you ask that?" [*]"What drives you to make such a statement?" BRAIN SEIZURE: [*]"What you inferred is not what you implied." [*]"Your problem is that you are thinking in a linear versus configurational framework." [*]"I'm not sure if I fail to disagree with that or not." Question As Opportunity THIS OR THAT: [*]"It is not a question of (this) or (that), but rather it is an issue of (whatever it is you want to say.)" [*]["Are you for or against capital punishment?"] "I don't think the issue is being for or against capital punishment. The real issue facing our country is the federal budget deficit. I propose that we.... " [*]"X IS ONE ISSUE, Y IS ANOTHER": [*]"X is certainly one topic that could be discussed, but Y is another..." [*]"Well, my track record is certainly one issue, but this month's agenda is another. Do you know that in the next five days...." General Cheap Shot Tactics and Irritants HYPOTHETICAL INSULT: [*]"Take this example: suppose you were a person who was incredibly stupid but was trying to come off as intelligent. What would the proper response be if you were me?" [*]"Let's just say that we knew for sure that you were a sexual pervert...." STUDIES HAVE SHOWN: [*]"Research at UCLA has proven conclusively...." [*]"I know the idea sounds unorthodox, but a recent study at Harvard has substantiated this view." FILIBUSTER: [*]"Since you are a true intellectual, I will have to give you a more comprehensive answer than most... Blah, Blah, Blah... (use WORD SALAD technique). [*]"Now that I have answered your point, do you have any other concerns?" (Repeat until the other person collapses or gives in.) DISTORTED ACTIVE LISTENING: [*]"If I hear you correctly, your point is... (get it all wrong)." [*]"It sounds as if you are saying that torturing children is a good idea...." (Dean and Marshall VanDruff)
Come on everyone, say it with me, "Post hoc ergo propter hoc"! It's just fun to say out loud, come on, do it! I should have taken latten, such a fun language. Gladius Maximus. . . mmmm.
What is it called when an arguement occurs and the statement "there is no point in talking to you. You won't listen to anything I say"? What about "You are just looking for stuff to complain about" when in fact a serious discussion is desired?
yeah..but, it takes 2 willing partners to discuss the matter at hand...if one refuses to participate in the said discussion...then, you've got nothing...except you talking to yourself. ya know..?
We'll it's not exactly who as "Wins" or who "Loses" an argument isn't exactly designed like that. Something more productive is supposed to be accomplished, either a flawed idea corrected, or a position defeneded, baring that, at least giving eachother a few new points to think on. It shouldn't be so personal as to have a winner and loser.
It's a fallacy to believe that anyone understands latin (apart from the Pope) in the 21st century. Post hoc ergo?
Everything comes under fallacy... if u want not to commit any fallacy only say "yes" or "no"..! let ur opponent commits one those fallacies...! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Logical Fallacies and the Art of Debate "Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself." -H. L. Mencken
Heh, well, Nevis, that's an interesting statement. For one, I have no idea why the pope would be expected to understand Latin, but then again I'm not up on popely stuff, and maybe that's some sort of requirement of the job. Latin is the language of science, it's not a dead language, but everyone who knows just a little bit about science as it stands today knows a bit of Latin. Most western languages are based in Latin, and still have very many parallels, so it's not as alien as a completely foreign language could be. And also, the fallacy I named was in the original list of fallacies posted in this thread, so I don't know what you are complaining about Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
