List of Fallacies

On the logic and reason page, we covered arguments that help people to organize information and think through reasoning. It includes gathering information, organizing it, and drawing a conclusion. The conclusion should be inferred or flow from the premises.

Logical fallacies often seem reasonable, but they contain a flaw in their reasoning. The flaw may be intentional or non-intentional. The purpose of this page is to help you identify fallacies when you’re exposed to them. Below is a list of common fallacies.

Logical Fallacies

Poisoning the Well

I start with this one since it is used first in debates or arguments. This fallacy is highly effective when someone wants to overwhelm an opponent early in a discussion, debate, or class. The attacker rapidly presents multiple small accusations in succession. While these attacks can be delivered quickly, responding to each one requires much more time and effort.

Example:

: Person A: “What did you think of the sermon today?”
Person B: “Your pastor is an ignorant fool who chases women, lies about the Bible, and only cares about money.”

Several fallacies appear here, but the rapid sequence of accusations makes it difficult to address each one and distracts the listener from forming a thoughtful response.

Ad Hominem

This fallacy attacks a person rather than their argument. Focuses on discrediting the individual instead of discussing the issue at hand. Often, it is used in an argument to discredit the opponent, particularly when the opponent doesn’t understand the information themselves.

Example:


A. Says: Didn't the pastor make a great point about salvation?

B Says: He is a liar and a women chaser. 

Hopefully he isn't, but that has nothing to do with salvation.

Alleged Certainty

In this fallacy, someone concludes without evidence—or with false evidence—while sounding extremely confident. Words like obviously, clearly, indeed, or everyone knows are often used to persuade listeners. 

Example:
“Everyone knows that Christians are absolute hypocrites.”
The phrase “everyone knows” suggests universal agreement, even though the claim is unfounded. It’s a common fallacy among people who hold some power and perhaps education when trying to impress or convince others.

Appeal to authority

This works all the time in advertising or in academic settings. Although a person may have extensive knowledge in one area, it doesn’t mean they are qualified in another. Football players may advertise for companies, because they are famous, and not because they are soap experts.

Example: As mentioned elsewhere, Dawkins accuses someone of begging the question. Although he is knowledgeable about evolution, he knows very little about logic.  In an argument related to philosophy, one might say are you disagreeing with Richard Dawkins. Most likely the answer is yes, because he knows very little outsideof evolution.

 Example: from A Manual For Creating Atheists( MFCA) Socrates earned the right to claim a conclusion from philosophical examination. The anonymous author of Hebrews writes. Instead, that faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the conviction (elenchus) or persuasion of things not seen. 

Sorry, but Peter Boghhosian does not know Koine Greek even though he attempts to impress you. Elenchus is the Latin transliteration of the greek word elencho.

If Socrates were to hear this phrase, I imagine he would say, “This may be conviction, but it is not an argument, not a cross-examination and testimony scrutiny, but is a jump without any justification, without proof, and without earning it. Where is the virtue in this?” 

This is a fascinating paragraph, but it's just filled with fallacies. He uses magical thinking when expressing what Socrates would have said. We can be assured that Socrates would have used the term argument, the concept of argumentation had not been used at that time. With his cleanliness I wouldn't check with him on chasing women Socrates did understand the Socratic Method, but did not understand a deductive argument. You are supposed to believe a man from 2,500 years ago was an authority on logic. He was interesting, a man with his hygiene, is really not an authority on logic or romance In the above MFCA paragraph, the author notes that the author of Hebrews is unclear, yet he knows that Socrates didn’t write any thing. Surprising that he doesn’t mention it. 

Appeal to Ignorance

This fallacy asserts that something must be true simply because it cannot be disproven. Many people expect proof, but definitive proof is rare outside mathematics or basic philosophy. Science does not prove—it gathers evidence through inductive reasoning.

Example: 

The multiverse theory is popular in some atheist circles, despite having no evidence for or against it. Because it cannot be disproven, some people treat it as 

Base Rate Fallacy

This occurs when someone focuses on specific or individual examples while ignoring broader statistical information. Winning once in ten tries is great to winning once in a thousand tries.

Example:


People often claim that most violence and wars are caused by religion, citing events like the Crusades or the Salem witch trials. While some conflicts do have religious motivations, the overall percentage is small.
According to The Encyclopedia of Wars by Axelrod and Phillips, only 123 of 1,763 wars were religious—about 6.8%. Although 123 wars are still too many, they are far fewer than the 1,640 wars unrelated to religion.

Critics sometimes mention the 19 people killed in the Salem witch trials (1692–1693). Their deaths were tragic, but the number is tiny compared to the more than 300 murders committed in Baltimore each year.

Blindspot Bias

Blindspot bias occurs when people can detect biases in others but fail to recognize their own. This prevents them from accepting certain types of information. For example, despite extensive historical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus, some individuals reject all evidence due to their own biases.

Empiricists, for instance, believe only in things they can touch, taste, weigh, or measure. This excludes concepts like love, hate, and God.

Example:
 

If someone saw a figure like Jesus coming to earth and shouting I’m returning to earth to save you he would say it was a magical trick. Yet not realizing they put any thought into whether it was a miracle, such as Jesus’ return.

Circular Arguments or Begging the Question:

It is an argument where the conclusion is found in the premise. 

Example:  

Premise 1: Miracles just don't happen.

Premise 2: Peope who sees miracles are lying, or easily fooled.

Conclusion: Therefore miracles are impossible.

This is similar to the patron saint of atheists: David Hume. His explanation is more complicated, but his logic is questionable to other philosophers.

Contextomy or Quote Mining

Contextomy occurs when someone distorts the meaning of a statement by removing key surrounding information. It is common and hopefully you will aware of it.

Example:


John Loftus writes, “Victor Reppert now says he doesn’t have faith.”
However, the surrounding text shows the complete statement:
“I am, quite frankly, prepared to admit that, given your definition of faith, I have no faith. Taken out of context, the meaning changes significantly. This is very similar to quote mining.

Definition Fallacy

This fallacy occurs when someone invents new definitions for words to support their argument. One such word is faith. Many will say, I don't have faith, but when questioned do you have faith in your wife there response might be: no I have belief in her. I don't see that as much different, but they have to say something.

Example:


In MCCA, Peter Boghossian defines faith as “pretending to know things you don’t know.” While not illegal, redefining words arbitrarily makes meaningful dialogue difficult. When Jesus says to the disciples, " Oh you of little faith,"  in Mathew 8:,26 sounds absurd if you say Oh, you of little pretending. 

Dunning–Kruger Effect

This cognitive bias describes how people with minimal knowledge often believe they are highly informed, only to perform poorly when tested. Conversely, highly knowledgeable individuals may underestimate their own competence. This occurs in many fields but is especially visible in discussions of religion, where some atheists have limited actual knowledge of the Bible.

Equivocation

Equivocation occurs when a word with multiple meanings is used improperly. I might say you can't cut your nails, and you say yes I can. There is a break down in communication if I'm talking building nails and the other is talking about finger nails.

Example:


Person A God is light to the world.

Person B: No he's not the sun is light,

Gibberish

This fallacy consists of intentionally confusing or unrelated statements meant to obscure the argument. Using several different fallacies in a couple paragraphs, mix in obscure words, tangle up a few odd thoughts and perhaps you can make someone your very bright.

Example:

Bellow is from the book,(MFCA) page 36

In Koine, the verb elencho is “I accuse, rebuke, reprove”“ and also "I expose, I showed it be guilty, I prove (in the same sense of putting the lie to a public statement), it's in John 3:20, first Corinthians 14:24, Ephesians 5: 11, 13; James 2:9. Souter's Lexicon of the New Testament lists elenchus as proof, possibly a persuasion" (Souter 1917). The evidence points to a straightforward fact: in the Apostolic Age, the word elenchus expanded in an important new context to take on the sense that is on the stage in Hebrews 11, that is, in a new way. They advocated, practiced, and helped make a success of using the word elenchus. Socrates used this term to indicate a rigorous process of argumentation or persuasion, or some other species of willing and satisfied affirmation - without argument - without going through the Socratic process of rigorous argumentation.”

Please appreciate some high-quality, fallacious arguments. This is, without a doubt, prize gibberish. Note that his purpose is to belittle the word faith in the Bible. Although you may think he understands Greek, he uses the word elenchus which is  the transliteration of the greek word elencho into Latin. Why? Either he doesn't know or he is just confusing the argument to make himself look like bright.  

He, also uses the etymology of the word elencho to really confuse; except he uses the Latin transliteration of the Geek word  Etymology is the study of words that change meaning over time. Now, for a magic carpet ride through the 2,800-year history of the Greek word. Why? Because it is confusing. 

Guilt by association is meant to discredit a person or argument by connecting it with something negative or disliked.  Even when little or no connection can be made. 

For example, seeing a member of a hate group standing outside a Jewish Temple and a house across the street has a Christian flag and concluding that the member of the hate group is a Christian. Everyone knows that if a Christian flag is within a hundred yards of the hate group, the group is Christian.

Example:

 Timothy McVey, the Oklahoma City bomber, was  identified as a Christian for the following reasons:

• He went to church when he was young.
• A picture of a man who might have been his father, carrying a Bible.
• There were churches near the bomb site.
• He owned a book written by a man who was part of a hate group.
• He went to gun shows.

Red Herring: 

 The term originated from fox hunt training. In this situation a smelly odor is dragged across a line between the dogs and a fox could cause the dogs to change directions.  Good for the fox, not so good for the hound.

Example: If asked a question about their belief, someone might change the topic to: "how about the cowboys." This might be used if the football team is doing very well. I quess this doesn't come up very often.

Singular or Underlying Cause: Human behavior is complex and often driven by multiple factors. Sometimes, people disregard several different reasons for an event, just to criticize something they don't like.

Example:    

Bank  robbers in Portland Oregon left religious cards at the scene. Some people claimed the robbery was due to their Chrisitan beliefs. It did mislead the crime investigation to some degree.  Surprisingly, they found the motive: they wanted money.

There is an abundance of fallacies we are faced with everyday; it is just a fact of life. However, being aware of them can make life easier.