10 Examples of Logical Fallacies Bafore we look further ints sume examples, check out this Video of the top 10 logical faacies that people try to claim to persuade athors. 4. Circular Reasoning Hsomsona is trying to convinces you of somathing using circular reasanit to back up their argument, they Just repeat thelr final polnt over and aver, For esampla, “Opium makes people sleepy beacause it has sleep-promoting atiributns.” instnad of offering you proof nr anything This argument doesn’t glve a reason for how orwhy oplum induces sleep. Instsad, It basically says that It ls because itis. No evidence is given to verify the original fact, which makes any argument using circular rsesoning lnvalld, 2. Hasty Generalization ‘Ahasty generalization Is when someone comes fo conclusion without examining all of the facte. Also known a5 ‘overgenerallzation, this Is where bleses and discrimination often become a factor. Let's say you are new to a town and the first group of people you see Is children, you could assume that everyone \who Ives In the town Is a chiki, However, your knowledge about the town thus faris extremely inited and you're not looking at any data aalde from your Inttal observation to prove your conduslon otherwias.. To avold making a hasty generalization, It's Important to filly research any toplc and recognize a wide varlety of facts and perapectives. Ht you want to eam more, here's our article about hasty generalizations and how to respond to them. 3. Slippery Slaps slippery slope argument Is one that assumes something catastrophic wil result from an event thet Is Insignificant ‘when looking at the blager picture. Ifyou related fo the first example given In this arte of assuming you were going to get fred over a smell mistake at work, then you may bs able to Klantity with this logkeal fallacy. Another example of this would be an argument suggesting that if you don't study every day of the week, you won't do well In school. And, Ifyou don't do wall In school, you wor't get a good Job. Sincs you will bs Iving without a good Job, you wil be homplsas. This auggsets that not studying every day wil result in aventually bscoming hamalass. However, thls argument Is making a lot of assumptions and taking them to an extreme measure. It ls leaving out all other factors thet would have to ocour in result in = person becoming homalass. 4, Straw Man This logical fallacy uses the technique of twisting someone eles’s case to make it sssier to digprove. Essentially, the person who Is engaghg In the straw man logical fellacy Is arguing agalnet « polrt that the other pereon didn't iy to make. loghcalfallactos examples In media | logloal fallacies warksheot | types of fallacles In philosophy ‘The Straw Man Is @ logical fallacy that uses the technique of twisting someone else's case to make It easier to disprove, For example, Hf one person clalme standardized testing shouldn't be given to students to measure thelr achievement, someone Who Is making a siraw man argument In retum might say, “itwe don't give any teats In schools, students ‘wil net take reponslbilty for thelr leamiig and they won't develop the sklls that are needed In adulthood.” ‘This response Is alming to weaken an opponents retionel argument by suggesting the other person Is making a claim that they're not. This may seem effective to the person making the straw man claim and to an audience simply because the opponent is being told that he or she is wrong, followed by a ststsment that would maks ganse ina different context, 5. Ad Hominam ‘The example given above In a potential polttcal debate regarding health care Is an ad hominem logical fallacy. This. type of argument attacks someone else's character In an attempt to cast doubta upon their claim. For example, the recommendations of a mela pediatrician could be discredited by @ mather who feels thet the doctor ‘can't understand her child because he has never been 2 mother, By discrediting the doctor in this way, the mother Is attempting to erode the doctor's opinion without really talking about It or even considering It.6, False Dichotomy In an argument using false dichotomy, only two options are presented to an opponent without any consideration of other potential options. This means the available considerations have been narrowed dawn only info opéons ‘whose answers are In the apeaker’s favor to attack thelr opponent, For example, “You sither fully support me, or you ans against me.” Or, “I thought you cared about other psopls, but you don't doneta money to chertty on a regular baala.” ‘These two samples don't offer any further options, such as, “I support most of your dacisions, but not all of them.” Or, “I donate my time, which Is often more valuable than a financial contbutton.* you want to Isam more about his top, here's an artiels about false dichotomy examples and how to counter them. 7. Appeal to Emotion An appaal to amotinn is when someone attampts tn parsuads others by using language that is often associated ‘whth emotions. This argument often comes in the form of, “This Is true, because ifs not tue, you wil be very sad” So, “I should have another chance to tum In this paper because | wee so busy last week with work from other ‘laases, family obligations, and my partner dumped me." While g stoner may foel thet the spesker’s altuation Is unustial and not very fair, the fact thet the student had a bad week doesn't make a strong objective argument 8. Equlvoeation An argument using equivocation Is presented In vagus terms, resulting In a misleading claim. Examples of this (ype of logical fallacy are a bit confusing... because theyre meant & be. “Eating hot dog Is better then nothing, but nothing Is better then setng a hamburger. This must mean thet hot dogs are better than hamburgers.” \ypes of fallacies and examples paf | Informal fellactes examples | logical fallacy detector An angument using equivocaltion Is presented In vagus tarms, resulting In a misleading claim. ‘Ths ambiguous term in this arguments ‘nothing’, Does the pereon mean that safing a hot dog is batter than eating nothing? Or, there Is nothing better than a hot dog’? They would rather set nothing than have a hamburger? ‘Or a hamburger Is the best food In the work’? This statement could be Interpreted both ways. 9, Bandwagon Appeal Bandwagon appeal uses peer pressure to Influence others ta accept or reject a clalm, For example, "A lot of people purchase the extended warranty, 80 It must bs smart ta do go." Or, “My entire family believes X, Y, and 2, ‘80 anyone who doesnt belleve these things Is wrong. However, there Is no factual basis offered as to why the original claims are true. Ths clalms simply raly on other people's opintone. 10, Fates Analogy This lagical fallacy uses tha ransoning that bscause two otharwiss unalike factors share ons similarity, they must actually be similar In nature, For example, “Both dogs and panpls respond best to discipline, so they must be alc.” When looking at this argument objectively and considering all of the differences between humans and dogs, you can recognize that there is no met to this claim.D) ‘Ad Hominem Fallacy ‘When people think of “arguments,” offen their first thought is of shouting matches riddled with parsonal attacks. Ironically, personel attacks run contrary to retional erguments. In logic and rhetoric, a pereonel attack ls called en ad hominem. Ad hominem Is Latin for “agalnet the man." Instead of advancing gaad sound reasoning, an ad homineen replaces logical argumentation with atiacklanguage unrelated to the truth of the matter. More specifically, the ad hominem Is a fallacy of relevance where someone rejects or citicizes ancther person's view on the basis of personal charaotaristice, background, physical appsarancs, of other features inrelevent to the argument at Issue, An ad hominem bs more then Just an Insult. Ifs an Insult used as If it were an argument ar evidence In support of a concluelon. Verbelly attacking peopla proves nothing about the truth or falelty of thelr cleime. Use of an ad hominem is commonly lniown in pols as “mudslinging.” Instead of ackireasing the canddate's stance on the Issues, of addressing his or her effectiveness as a stalssman or stateswoman, an ad hominem focuses of Personally Issues, speech patterns, wardrobe, style, and ather thinge that affect popularty but have no bearing ‘on thelr competence, In this way, an ad hominem can be unethical, seeking to manipulate voters by appealing to relevant folbies and name-calling Inatead of addreasing core lsaues. In this last election cycle, personal altacks ‘wars vollsyed freely fram all sides of tha political aisle, with both Clinton and Trump facing thair fair share of ad hominem fallacies, Ad honinam is an ineulf used as iff ware an argument or evidence in support of a conclusion, ‘A thread on Quora llts the following doozies agalnst Hillary Cilnton: “Klary Clinton,” "Crooked Hillary." "Hilla the Hun," “Bhillary."“Hitlery, “Knton," “Hikiebest, “Defender of Child rapists,” “Corporats Whore,” “Mr. President," “Holl Hillary." “Wicked Witch of the West Wing,” "Robberty Hilham Clinton," "Mrs. Carpetbagger’, and the deckledly unsubtle, “The Devil” ‘The NY Dally News offers an amusing Ist of Insults against Donald Trump: “Short fingered Vulgarlan,” “Angry Creamsicle,” "Fascist Camivel Barker,” “F*ckface von Cliwnstick," “Decomposing Jaok-O-Lantem,* ‘Chalrman of the Saddam Hussein Fanclub,” "Radst Clementine,” Sentient Caps Lock Button,” "Cheete Jesus," “Tangetins ‘Tomedo," and parhaps the most craative/itarary referancs, “Roma Buming in Man Form." ‘The use of ad hominem often signals the polnt at which a chil disagreement has decended Into a “ight.” \Whather its siblings, frionds, or lovers, most sveryons has had a verbal disagreement crumble into a disjointed shouting match of angry Insults andl accusations elmed at dlecrediting the other person, When these Ineulte ‘crowd out a substantial argument, they become ad hominem. 2 ‘Strewman Argument Is much sasler t defeat your opponent's angument when Its made of straw. The Strawman argument Is aptty named attor a harmless, lifeless, scarecrow. In the strawman argument, someone attacks a position the ‘opponent dosan't really hold, Instead of contending with the aotual argument, he or she altacks the equivalent ofa lifeless bundie of straw, an easily defeated effigy, which the opponent never tended upon defending anyway. ‘The strawman argument ls a cheap and easy way to make one's position look stronger than Its, Using this fallacy, opposing views ate characterized as “or-startars,” lifeless, truthlass, and wholly unreliable. By ‘comparison, one’s own position will look better for it. You can Imagine how strawmen arguments and ad hominem fallacies can occur together, demonizing opponents and discrediting thelr views. With the strawmen argument, someone attacks a position the opponent dossn't really hold. ‘This fallacy can bs unethical ifits dona on purpose, dalbarataly mischaracterizing the appanents position for the sake of decelving othore. But oftan the atrawman argument ls accidental, because the offender dosen't Feallze the are overeimplifying @ nuanced position, or misrepresenting a narrow, cautious clain ae It R wane broad and foolhardy.