Ad Hominem: Attacking the character or personal traits of an opponent rather than

addressing their argument.

Straw Man: Distorting or misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to

attack.

Appeal to Emotion: Manipulating emotions to win an argument instead of relying on reason

and evidence.

False Dilemma: Presenting only two extreme options as if they are the only choices when
there are more possibilities.

Appeal to Authority: Using the opinion of an authority figure as evidence without

considering the expert's credentials or relevance.

Hasty Generalization: Drawing a broad conclusion based on a limited sample of evidence.

Circular Reasoning: Restating the argument as evidence to support itself.

Slippery Slope: Claiming that a small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of negative
consequences.

Appeal to Tradition: Arguing that something is valid or better because it's been done a
certain way for a long time.

Post Hoc Fallacy (Causal Fallacy): Assuming that because one event happened after
another, the first event caused the second.

Appeal to Ignorance: Arguing that a claim is true because it hasn't been proven false, or
false because it hasn't been proven true.

Red Herring: Introducing irrelevant information or arguments to divert attention from the
main issue.

Equivocation: Using ambiguous language to mislead or obscure the real meaning of an

argument.

Appeal to Popularity (Bandwagon Fallacy): Asserting that something must be true or good
because many people believe or support it.

Burden of Proof Fallacy: Shifting the burden of proof onto the opponent to disprove a claim
rather than providing evidence for one's own claim.

False Analogy: Drawing a comparison between two unrelated things to make a point.

No True Scotsman: Reinterpreting evidence or shifting the goalposts when an example that
contradicts a claim is presented.
Genetic Fallacy: Rejecting an argument based on its origin or history rather than its merits.

Fallacy Fallacy: Concluding that an argument is false because it contains a fallacy, without
evaluating the argument's substance.

Loaded Question: Asking a question that contains an assumption or bias.

Tu Quoque (You Too): Dismissing an opponent's argument by pointing out their own
hypocrisy.

Composition Fallacy: Assuming that what is true for the parts is true for the whole.

Division Fallacy: Assuming that what is true for the whole is true for the parts.

Appeal to Nature: Arguing that something is good because it is natural or bad because it is
not natural.

Black-and-White Fallacy: Presenting a situation as having only two possible outcomes

when there are other options.

Special Pleading: Applying a double standard to exempt one's own position from criticism.

The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy: Cherry-picking data or focusing on specific details to suit
one's argument while ignoring the bigger picture.

Appeal to Complexity: Arguing that something is true because it is too complex for the
average person to understand.

Begging the Question: Assuming the conclusion is true in the premise.

Moving the Goalposts: Changing the criteria for acceptance of an argument after the
argument has been presented.

Middle Ground Fallacy: Assuming that a compromise between two positions is the correct
or best solution.

False Cause Fallacy: Assuming that because two events correlate, one must have caused
the other.

The Fallacy of Sunk Costs: Continuing a behavior or endeavor because of the resources
already invested, even if it's no longer rational.

Anecdotal Fallacy: Using personal anecdotes or isolated examples as evidence to support

a general claim.

Ambiguity Fallacy: Using ambiguous language to deceive or confuse.

The Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle: Failing to connect the middle term of a syllogism
with the major and minor terms.