In this article, we will discuss the list of fallacies and examples. Fallacies are logical mistakes or misunderstandings that undermine an argument. Fallacies demand knowledge and understanding because they fundamentally refute a person’s argument. By examining and removing their own weak arguments, a person can make a much stronger argument. One can avoid being persuaded by flawed logic or false information by spotting fallacies in other people’s arguments.
List of Fallacies and Examples
Have a look at the following list of fallacies and examples.
The Fallacy Fallacy
When identifying fallacies, it’s critical to keep in mind that just because an argument is based on a fallacy, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the claim it supports is false.
A fallacious claim does not necessarily imply that the argument’s premise is false; it merely shows that the claim is not supported by the argument. To put it another way, their argument is terrible even though they might not be entirely off.
Tom: I love dogs, so they make wonderful companions.
Leo: I believe you are using the fallacy of anecdotal evidence to support your argument. Because of this, I have a hard time considering dogs as good pets.
Nancy: They may be relying on that fallacy, but there is a tonne of hard evidence to the contrary.
The Tu Quoque Fallacy
The Latin phrase “you also” serves as the inspiration for the tu quoque fallacy, a fallacious tactic used to discredit an opponent by responding to criticism with criticism while never actually presenting a defense of the initially contested claim.
Jim: I don’t think you should be considered for this promotion until you have more training in human resource management, the manager said.
George: Who are you to assert this when you have no prior knowledge of human resource management?
The Ad Hominem Fallacy
The ad hominem fallacy is committed when someone’s argument is criticized logically rather than personally. They will instead attack the other’s viewpoint by criticizing their appearance, personality, or other unimportant traits. These assaults may also target institutions or groups.
Janet: To confirm the accuracy of these data sets, we should review them once more.
Smith: Given your math issues, I was expecting you to say that.
The “No True Scotsman” Fallacy
This fallacy incorrectly diverts counterexamples to a claim by rearranging the terms or placement of the initial claim to omit the counter-example. It frequently serves as evidence for claims that rely on generalizations.
In other words, the speaker changes their originc3aqwal claim rather than admitting that there is a counter-example.
Emma: Marketers advise against placing two calls to action on the same landing page.
Carol: With our most recent campaign, marketer Lara had great success by including two calls to action on a single landing page.
Emma: Due to the fact that she has two call-to-actions on one landing page, Lara is obviously not a true marketer.
The Personal Incredulity Fallacy
If you don’t comprehend how or why something is true, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it is false. Because of a single instance of ignorance or widespread ignorance, a claim cannot be deemed invalid.
Since I don’t understand how redesigning our website increased conversions, I assume there was another factor at work.
The Burden of Proof Fallacy
The burden of proof rests with the one making the claim that something is true. Until someone else can demonstrate that a statement is false, it is invalid to assert that it is true. Similar to this, it is untrue to assert that something cannot refute in order for it to be true.
No one has expressed dissatisfaction with our marketing approach, so I hazard a guess that everyone likes it.
The Middle Ground Fallacy
The fallacious presumption that a compromise between two drastically different points of view is always true forms the foundation of this fallacy’s argument. In this kind of discussion, a middle position that rules out the possibility that either, or both, could be wholly true or false is also unacceptable.
I disagree with Katie when she says that our employer needs to raise our pay; I think the roles should be switched around. As a compromise, our employer is providing us with a small end-of-year bonus.
The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
The catchy name of this fallacy was inspired by a colorful anecdote. About a Texan who shoots his gun at a barn wall before painting a target around the nearest collection of bullet holes. He then shows off his shooting skills by pointing at the target that is in bullets.
Speakers who use the Texas sharpshooter fallacy pick and choose which data clusters to use to support their arguments. They search for patterns and correlations that help them achieve their goals rather than letting the totality of the evidence point them in the direction of a logical conclusion. They disregard information that contradicts their findings or suggests the clusters may not have had statistical significance.
According to Cooper, his ten new clients this month are proof of his business success. He ignores the fact that his sales are down 60% from the previous year.
The Anecdotal Evidence Fallacy
This fallacy substitutes subjective examples for rational arguments. Arguments that heavily rely on anecdotal evidence frequently ignore the fact that one instance, possibly an isolated one, cannot provide proof for a more general claim.
I constantly experience issues with our email system. I believe the business should replace the entire system.
The Correlation/Causation Fallacy
Even if two things appear to be connected, it doesn’t mean that one of them was unquestionably responsible for the other. Even though it may appear to be a simple fallacy to spot, it can be challenging to do so in practice, especially if you really want to find a connection between two pieces of data to back up your claim.
Last week, a lot of new people visited our website. The font on the website was also updated last week. This makes me think that the increase in website views was due to the new font we used.
The Hasty Generalization Fallacy
This fallacy happens when someone draws broad conclusions from shaky or insufficient data. In other words, they ignore potential refutations in favor of assuming the truth of a claim that has some, but insufficient, supporting evidence.
Sandra learned a lot from our previous corporate retreat. To ensure that everyone in the company has the opportunity to learn, a sizeable portion of our budget must allocate the annual retreats.
The Slothful Induction Fallacy
The opposite of the aforementioned fallacy of hasty generalization is slothful induction. When there is enough logical evidence to draw a conclusion, but the person rejects it, attributing the result to coincidence or something unrelated, this fallacy occurs.
Peter: I was happy to see that our onboarding procedure improved employee retention. The assistance they received when they first started, 98% of the employees said when I asked them last week why they stayed with the company.
James: The fact that dogs are welcome in the workplace, in my opinion, is the real reason everyone enjoys it here.
The False Dilemma Fallacy
By splitting complex issues into two sides that are fundamentally opposite to one another, this common fallacy deceives. Instead of acknowledging that most (if not all) issues can be thought of on a spectrum of possibilities and stances. The false dilemma fallacy asserts that there are only two possible outcomes, which are mutually exclusive.
This fallacy can give false credence to extreme positions while ignoring opportunities for compromise or reframing the issue, which makes it particularly harmful.
If our enemy supports this cause, it cannot be genuine. Given how dissimilar their ideals are from ours, we shouldn’t support this cause.
The Appeal to Authority Fallacy
Even though they aren’t always accurate, appeals to authority can quickly turn dangerous when you place too much trust in one person’s judgment, particularly when that person is trying to validate something that is outside of their area of expertise.
An already strong argument can be strengthened significantly by having reliable authority support it, but this cannot be your only point of emphasis. Just because a powerful person believes something to be true doesn’t mean it is.
Our manager has stated that we don’t need to be concerned about climate change, so I no longer need to look into ways for this company to be more environmentally friendly.
The Bandwagon Fallacy
Even if a sizable majority of people agree with a claim, that does not necessarily mean that it is true in all cases. Even though it is frequently used as a stand-alone defense, an argument’s popularity does not prove its veracity. The qualifications of the population validating the argument or the existence of contradictory evidence are not in this type of argument.
Despite the fact that most of us anticipate seeing bandwagon arguments in advertisements (such as “three out of four people think X brand soap cleans body best”), this fallacy can easily enter into regular meetings and conversations.
Everybody at our company appears to enjoy the rules. This implies that we are not solicit feedback from new hires.
The Straw Man Fallacy
You are making a fallacy when your opponent misrepresents or oversimplifies your position to make it simpler to attack or refute it. By presenting a version of your actual position that is superficially similar but ultimately unjustified, speakers who use this fallacy give the impression that they can easily defeat you rather than fully address it.
Harry: Mark is a brilliant content producer, and I believe he ought to be given a promotion.
Lilly: Do you mean to say that none of our other content producers have any talent? This way of thinking is bad for our team.
The premise of a slippery slope argument is that a particular course of action will unavoidably lead to a series of related events. The slippery slope fallacy makes the assumption that a reasonable premise or starting point will result in improbable or absurd outcomes without providing any evidence to back up its claim.
The federal government should not prohibit drugs. If not, the government should also outlaw the use of tobacco and alcohol. Also required would be the regulation of fatty and junk food. Soon, daily tooth brushing and exercise would be required by the government.
Red herrings are fallacious arguments that aim to confuse or divert attention from the real issue at hand. It frequently involve an irrelevant concept, piece of information, or circumstance that has little to do with the core issue.
Red herrings are often used as a deterrent tactic when someone wants to divert attention from a contentious or dangerous subject. However, red herrings can also occur accidentally.
Someone might counter that many people’s lives are made more peaceful and meaningful by faith in God in a discussion about whether or not God exists. Given that the existence of God has nothing to do with whether or not religions can be beneficial to people, this would be an illustration of a red herring. A belief’s beneficial psychological effects are not evidenced that it is true.
Appeal to Hypocrisy
The appeal to hypocrisy, also known as the tu quoque fallacy, concentrates on the hypocrisy of the opponent. In order to divert attention from oneself, the tu quoque fallacy entails blaming the other person for the same problem or a related problem.
The tu quoque fallacy is an attempt to shift responsibility. The fallacy typically occurs when the argumentator tries to deflect criticism by coming off as hypocritical.
Son, when I was your age, I smoked. It is idiotic now as it was then. I forbid you from smoking, chewing, vaping, using nicotine gum, or participating in any other tobacco-related behavior that today’s youth engage in.
An argument is said to be making a causal fallacy when it erroneously assumes that a cause and effect are linked. Consider other fallacies involving unlikely causes as a descendant of the causal fallacy.
One example is the false cause fallacy, which occurs when the cause is determined without having enough proof to back it up. Another is called the post hoc fallacy, which occurs when something is attributed as the cause of an effect simply because it occurred first rather than because it actually caused it.
Every time a rooster crows, the sun rises. Crows must have created the universe.
The sunk cost fallacy occurs when someone persists in doing something despite whether the additional costs outweigh the potential benefits because of the effort they have already expended. According to economic theory, sunk costs are outlaying from the past that are no longer recoverable.
My time in college is half over. This is so difficult, and it’s not nearly as enjoyable as I had hoped, but I dunno. I’ll probably complete it and earn my degree.
The purposeful use of language to mislead, confuse, or deceive is known as equivocation. Or, saying one thing while actually meaning something else.
When used to deceive the audience into thinking you are saying something you are not in a political speech, an ethical debate, or an economics report, it is referred to as a fallacy rather than a “play on words.”
His political party wants to use your priceless tax money to finance a large government. However, a federal investment strategy for significant programs is being organized by my political party.
Appeal to Pity
Instead of persuading you of something using facts, an appeal to pity relies on arousing your emotions. An attempt to sway a crowd by appealing to their emotions is known as an appeal for sympathy.
Professor, I apologize for the poor quality of this work; I am aware of it. I want to meet with you to talk about how I can do better on our upcoming assignment.
Appeal to Ignorance
This fallacy basically says that a claim is true because its falsity hasn’t been proven yet. Numerous contexts, including casual conversations, extensive advertising, and political campaigns, would have featured it.
Thomas claims that there is a chance that aliens exist because there is no proof that they don’t!
Against The Man
Arguments frequently use the ad hominem fallacy, also referred to as the “against the man” fallacy. It entails taking criticism from the opposition personally. If you criticize or comment personally rather than debating the merits of the opposing side’s point of view, ad hominem can be used against you.
Carla asserts that one shouldn’t follow Ronald’s advice when choosing the budget for the yearly fashion show because he has a terrible fashion sense.
The Bottom Line
Learning to recognize fallacies when they arise and how to respond to them will make it easier to negotiate conflicts in both personal and professional contexts. The aforementioned advice is meant to help you steer clear of some of the most common argument pitfalls and use logic instead.