A repository of user-generated examples
By Alfredo and ' The People '
A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning.
Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought,
and they're often very sneakily used by people to fool others. Don't be fooled! This website has been
designed to help you identify and call out faulty logic, wherever it may raise its ugly, incoherent head...
and to hear examples you can provide for us to see.
Read the study materials (option on the top of this website) to learn about some logical fallacies, and
(also on the top of this website) click to provide us with examples of these fallacies. Thank you!
To attack a person's character to avoid engaging with what (s)heis actually
saying.
You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism
with criticism.
Nicole identified that Hannah had committed a logical fallacy, but instead of addressing the substance of her claim, Hannah accused Nicole of committing a fallacy earlier on in the conversation.
Despite showing compeling evidence, the opponent simply shifts the goalposts and
claim it doesn't apply because supposedly, is not a 'true' example.
This kind of
post-rationalization is a common way of avoiding valid criticisms.
Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.
The burden of proof lies with someone who is making a claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove.
The inability, or disinclination, to disprove a claim does not render that claim valid, nor
give it any credence whatsoever.
Bertrand declares that a teapot is, at this very moment, in orbit around the Sun between the Earth and Mars, and that because no one can prove him wrong, his claim is therefore a valid one.
Also known as the 'Bandwagon fallacy': The claim that an idea, because hold as truth (or practiced) by
many,
is automatically rendered a truthfull, or valid.
Although usually there is a correlation, the validity of a claim never relies on how many people hold it
as truthful.
"If CocaCola / Pepsi is as bad as you think, WHY are so many people (including doctors!) drinking it? We have been drinking these for YEARS. Since everyone is drinking them, obviously they can't really be a health threat "
A statement that is technically accurate, but only after accounting for serveral exceptions, making the
initial argument significantly weaker.
In many cases, the listed exceptions are given in lieu of evidence or support for the claim, not in
addition to evidence or support for the claim
"Besides great charities, community cohesion, rehabilitation programs, helping children learn positive social-values, etc, yeah: religion poisons everything..."
Named after the Latin experssion 'Post hoc ergo procter hoc' ("after this, therefore because of this").
This fallacy that assumes "since event Y followed event X, therefore event Y must have been the cause of
event
X".
A tenant moves into an apartment and the building's furnace goes faulty. The manager blames the tenant's arrival for the malfunction. One event merely followed the other, in the absence of causality.
Also known as "anecdotal evidence", or "The Incomplete-evidence Fallacy".
To conveniently point at a single (often rare!) case that seems to confirm a particular position,
while simultaneouly ignoring the overwhelming amount of data or studies contradicting it.
"You may think smoking is bad for health, but that is all rubbish! Let me tell you: my grandfather
smoked cigars ALL his
life, and he lived to be 120 years old!""
When an opponent successfully addresses a point, and then the arguer brings up a new (further) point to
be addressed.
The new arguments (meant to avoid the original) are made more and more difficult
(or
diverse) until the person eventually fail to address them all.
