f a l l a c i e s

A fallacy is a component of an argument which, being demonstrably flawed in its logic or form, renders the whole argument invalid

Dicto Simpliciter - an argument based on an unqualified generalization. The argument is a fallacy. Exercise is good is an unqualified generalization. For instance, if you have heart disease, exercise is bad, not good. Many people are ordered by their doctors not to exercise. You must qualify the generalization. You must say exercise is usually good, or exercise is good for most people. Otherwise you have committed a Dicto Simpliciter.

Hasty Generalization - The generalization is reached too hastily E.g. I can’t speak French. You can’t speak French. I must therefore conclude that nobody who is studying in our university can speak French.

Post Hoc - E.G. Let’s not take Bill on our picnic. Every time we take him out with us, it rains.

Contradictory Premises - E.G. If God can do anything, can He make a stone so heavy that He won’t be able to lift it? ~Of Course. ~But if He can do anything, He can lift the stone. ~when the premises of an argument contradict each other, there can be no argument. If there is an irresistible force, there can be no immovable object. If there is an immovable object, there can be no irresistible force.

Ad Misericordiam - E.G. A man applies for a job. When the boss asks him what his qualifications are, he replies that he has a wife and six children at home, the wife is a helpless cripple, the children have nothing to eat, no clothes to wear, no shoes on their feet, there are no beds in the house, no coal in the cellar, and winter is coming. ~there is no argument. The man never answered the boss’s question about his qualifications. Instead he appealed to the boss’s sympathy. He committed the fallacy of Ad Misericordiam.

False Analogy - E.G. Students should be allowed to look at their textbooks during examinations. After all, surgeons have X-rays to guide them during an operation, lawyers have briefs to guide them during a trial, carpenters have blueprints to guide them when they are building a house. Why, then, shouldn’t students be allowed to look at their textbooks during an examination? ~The argument is all wrong. Doctors, lawyers, and carpenters aren’t taking a test to see how much they have learned, but students are. The situations are altogether different, and you can’t make an analogy between them.

Hypothesis Contrary to Fact - E.G. If Madame Curie had not happened to leave a photographic plate in a drawer with a chunk of pitchblende, the world today would not know about radium. ~Maybe Madame Curie would have discovered radium at some later date. Maybe somebody else would have discovered it. Maybe any number of things would have happened. You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it.

Poisoning the Well - E.G. Two men are having a debate. The first one gets up and says, ‘My opponent is a notorious liar. You can’t believe a word that he is going to say.’ ~This is not fair. The first man has poisoned the well before anybody could drink from it. He has hamstrung his opponent before he could even start.

PS. I randomly found this information in one of the fanfictions I was reading. Unfortunately, I can't remember which one. If I manage to find the website, I will post it. At the moment, sorry for the inconvenience!