Informal Fallacies

Fallacies of Ambiguity contain words or phrases which carry more than one meaning.

Fallacies of Amphiboly arise when the structure of the sentence produces multiple meanings.

Fallacies of Accent arise when words or sentences are taken out of context, or when the stressed word or syllable is unclear.

Fallacies of Hypostatization arise when abstract concepts are assumed to have concrete attributes.

Fallacies of Equivocation arise when the meanings of pivotal words change during the course of an argument.

Fallacies of Division arise when the parts are assumed to have the properties of the whole.

Fallacies of Composition arise when the whole is assumed to have the attributes of the parts.

Fallacies of Presumption contain unfounded or unproven assumptions in three forms: when facts are overlooked, evaded, and distorted.

Overlooking the Facts

Fallacies of Sweeping Generalization arise when a general rule is applied to a special case.

Fallacies of Hasty Generalization arise when a special case is used to formulate a general conclusion.

Fallacies of Bifurcation arise when two alternatives are presumed mutually exclusive (also known as a false dilemma).

Evading the Facts

Fallacies of Begging the Question arise when an argument's argument asserts the conclusion in another form instead of proving it (also known as circular logic).

Fallacies of Question-Begging Epithets arise when an argument uses slanted language in order to affirm the point without offering evidence (also known as mud slinging, emotive language, name-calling, use of loaded words, and verbal suggestion).

Fallacies of Complex Questions arise when a question is asked in which the basis for the question is presumed (also known as loaded questions, trick questions, leading questions, fallacies of false questions, and fallacies of many questions).

Fallacies of Special Pleading arise when a double standard is applied, using slanted language in order to convince a distinction exists to justify the double standard.

Distorting the Facts

Fallacies of False Analogy arise when an analogy is misused and distorts the facts of the case at hand.

Fallacies of False Cause arise when two events are presumed connected when no such connection has been established (also known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc).

Fallacies of Irrelevant Thesis arise when an argument ignores the issue which it is attempting to address, while making the presumption thereof (also known as an irrelevant conclusion, ignoring the issue, befogging the issue, diversion, and red herring).

Fallacies of Relevance contain arguments in which the premises are irrelevant to the attempted conclusion, and often draw upon emotive language for effect.

Personal Attacks (also known as ad hominem attacks)

Genetic Fallacies arise when an argument's origins or background are condemned in order to presume an attack against the argument itself.

Abusive ad Hominem Attacks arise when the opponent is attacked insultingly, thereby presuming to attack the argument itself.

Circumstantial ad Hominem Attacks arise when the opponent is attacked by insinuating vested interests, which are presumed to attack the argument's credibility.

Tu Quoque Attacks arise when the opponent is attacked with hypocritical behavior in an attempt to undermine the argument.

Poisoning the Well Attacks arise when a statement is made which discredits the source of evidence, thereby precluding discussion.

Appeals

Mob Appeals arise when an argument is made to powerful emotions which may sway large groups of people (also known as appeal to the masses, or argumentum ad populum).

Appeals to Pity arise when an argument plays specifically on pity in order to persuade (also known as argumentum ad misericordiam [argument to a sense of pity]).

Appeals to Authority arise when an argument is supposedly justified by citing some source of expertise which is not competent in the issue at hand (also known as argumentum ad verecundiam [argument to a sense of modesty]). There are several kinds:

Appeal to the Authority of One, which occurs when a single incompetent person is appealed;

Appeal to the Authority of Many, in which the fact many people agree with something is presumed to be an indicator of correctness or validity (also known as argumentum ad populum);

Appeal to the Authority of a Select Few, in which an argument appeals to aristocratic feelings (also known as a snob appeal);

Appeal to the Authority of Tradition, in which the fact an issue is traditional is taken to be an indicator of correctness or validity.

Appeals to Ignorance arise when inability to disprove a conclusion is taken as proof thereof (also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam).

Appeals to Fear arise when threat of force is used in order to advance a conclusion (also known as argumentum ad baculum [argument to a stick]).

(Taken from With Good Reason, Third Edition, by S. Morris Engel, �1986 by St. Martin's Press, Inc.-this is not an appeal to authority!)