How many fallacies are there

For example: Imagine that after watching the first six episodes of a TV show, you decide the show isn't for you. Those six episodes are your "sunk cost. No marriage. No kids. No steady job. But I've been with him for seven years, so I'd better stay with him. This is so tough, and it's not nearly as fun as I thought it would be, but I don't know. I guess I'll finish it and get my degree. Appeal to authority is the misuse of an authority's opinion to support an argument.

While an authority's opinion can represent evidence and data, it becomes a fallacy if their expertise or authority is overstated, illegitimate, or irrelevant to the topic. For example, citing a foot doctor when trying to prove something related to psychiatry would be an appeal to authority fallacy. It's true. My computer science teacher says so. Equivocation happens when a word, phrase, or sentence is used deliberately to confuse, deceive, or mislead.

In other words, saying one thing but meaning another. When it's poetic or comical, we call this a "play on words. But my political party is planning strategic federal investment in critical programs. I said I'd never speak to my ex-girlfriend again. And I didn't. I just sent her some pictures and text messages. An appeal to pity relies on provoking your emotions to win an argument rather than factual evidence.

Appealing to pity attempts to pull on an audience's heartstrings, distract them, and support their point of view. Someone accused of a crime using a cane or walker to appear more feeble in front of a jury is one example of appeal to pity. The appearance of disability isn't an argument on the merits of the case, but it's intended to sway the jury's opinion anyway. I know I only turned in a sentence and some clip art, but you have to understand, my grandmother suddenly died while traveling in the Northern Yukon, and her funeral was there so I had to travel, and my parents got divorced in the middle of the ceremony, and all the stress caused me to become catatonic for two weeks.

Have some pity — my grandmother's last wish was that I'd get an A in this class. I'd like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss how I can do better on our next assignment. The bandwagon fallacy assumes something is true or right or good because others agree with it. In other words, the fallacy argues that if everyone thinks a certain way, then you should, too. One problem with this kind of reasoning is that the broad acceptance of a claim or action doesn't mean that it's factually justified.

People can be mistaken, confused, deceived, or even willfully irrational in their opinions, so using them to make an argument is flawed.

It must be a popular thing to do. It must be the right thing to do. We hope this primer on logical fallacies helps you to navigate future disputes with friends, family, and online acquaintances without descending into vitriol or childish name-calling. Knowing your logical fallacies can also help when you're working on your next research paper.

You may want to brush up on controversial research topics while you're at it, so you're even more prepared. In this example, the author assumes that if one event chronologically follows another the first event must have caused the second. But the illness could have been caused by the burrito the night before, a flu bug that had been working on the body for days, or a chemical spill across campus.

There is no reason, without more evidence, to assume the water caused the person to be sick. Genetic Fallacy: This conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth. In this example the author is equating the character of a car with the character of the people who built the car.

However, the two are not inherently related. Begging the Claim: The conclusion that the writer should prove is validated within the claim. Arguing that coal pollutes the earth and thus should be banned would be logical.

But the very conclusion that should be proved, that coal causes enough pollution to warrant banning its use, is already assumed in the claim by referring to it as "filthy and polluting.

Circular Argument: This restates the argument rather than actually proving it. In this example, the conclusion that Bush is a "good communicator" and the evidence used to prove it "he speaks effectively" are basically the same idea. Specific evidence such as using everyday language, breaking down complex problems, or illustrating his points with humorous stories would be needed to prove either half of the sentence.

In this example, the two choices are presented as the only options, yet the author ignores a range of choices in between such as developing cleaner technology, car-sharing systems for necessities and emergencies, or better community planning to discourage daily driving.

Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather than his or her opinions or arguments. In this example, the author doesn't even name particular strategies Green Peace has suggested, much less evaluate those strategies on their merits. Instead, the author attacks the characters of the individuals in the group. Getting on the bandwagon is one such instance of an ad populum appeal. Support their work by donating and purchasing posters and cards at the Thinking Shop.

How did Lean Startup come to be, and what are its basic precepts? Understanding them is a prerequisite for true mastery. Logical fallacies are mistakes and flaws in reasoning. Studying logical fallacies is a good way to improve your thinking and reasoning. If you'd like to become better at overcoming these fallacies I suggest following guide: Improve your thinking to avert bad decisions.

You presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other. Your logical fallacy is appeal to emotion. You attempted to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument. Your logical fallacy is the fallacy fallacy. You presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong.

Your logical fallacy is slippery slope. You said that if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen. You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.