1.

Argumentum Ad Misericordiam:
i. (A.K.A: Appeal to Pity)
ii. When feelings of pity and guilt or related
emotions are appealed for the sake of getting the conclusion
accepted.
1. Ex.) I studied really hard for this
test and if you give me a failing grade I wont be able to
go to college and succeed. I might as well die.
2. Affirmation of the Consequent:
i. An error in formal logic where if the
consequent is said to be true, the antecedent is said to be true,
as a result.
1. Ex.) If its raining, then the
streets are wet. The streets are wet. Therefore, it is
raining.
2. Ex.) If taxes are lowered I have
more money to spend. I have more money to spend.
Therefore, taxes must have lowered.
3. Ambiguity:
i. Use of double meaning or ambiguity of
language to mislead or misrepresent the truth.
1. Ex.) It is said that we have a
good understanding of the universe. Therefore, we know
exactly how and when it began.
a. What do we mean
by good understanding
4. Special Pleading
i. Applying standards, principles, and/or rules
to other people or circumstances, while making oneself or
certain circumstances exempt from the same critical criteria,
without providing adequate justification. (Double standard)
1. Ex.) Teacher criticizing students
for eating in class when they do exactly the same.
5. Argumentum Ad Antiquitatem
i. We have been doing ______ for generations.
Therefore, we should continue to do ______.
6. Argumentum Ad Baculum
i. Argument using the threat of force as
justification
7. Argumentum Ad Crumenam

i. Using wealth to determine the correctness of

a statement
1. Ex.) That man is poor so the
poetry he wrote must be bad.
2. Ex.) He is rich so he must be
right.
8. Argumentum Ad Hominem
i. Attacking the person, not the argument (e.g.
well youre a communist so your opinion is wrong)
9. Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam
i. Arguments of this form assume that since
something has not been proven false, it is therefore true.
Conversely, such an argument may assume that since
something has not been proven true, it is therefore false.
1. Ex.) Since you cant prove that
ghost do no exist, they must exist
10.

Argumentum Ad Lazarum
i. Concluding that a statement is true because
the speaker is poor.
1. Ex.) Simon said that all horses
fly. Its true because he is poor.
2. Opposite of Argumentum Ad
Crumenam
11.

Accentus
i. Type of ambiguity that arises when the
meaning of a sentence is changed by placing an unusual
prosodic stress (emphasis on a word)
1. I dont really love you now.
(meaning of the sentence changes depending on what
word is emphasized by the speaker)
12.

Argumentum Ad Nauseum
i. A statement is considered true because it is
constantly repeated.
13.

Argumentum Ad Novitatem
i. Claiming that a statement is true because it
is new and modern.
14.

Argumentum Ad Numerum
i. A statement is considered true because
many people believe it without much evidence.

15.

Equivocation
i. Same word/statement is used in two different

meanings.
1. Ex.) A feather is light. What is
light cannot be dark. Therefore a feather cannot be dark.
16.

Argumentum Ad Verecundiam
i. the appeal of an authority is used to
established a statement; authority usually does not have the
qualitative traits to justify claim.
17.

Begging the Question (Circular Reasoning)

i. Trying to make a conclusion by simply
restating the claim again
1. Ex.) Sunny Hills football team is
the best because they beat all the other teams.
18.

Bifurcation
i. The false dilemma; when youre asked to
choose between two choices when there should really be more.
1. Ex.) Are you a Republican or a
Democrat?
19.

Composition
i. Assuming something about the whole of
something is true just because it is true for a part of it
ii. Ex: Paper clips are ugly, therefore, your
paper clip Eiffel Tower is ugly.
20.

Shifting the Burden of Proof

i. is a kind of logical fallacy in argumentation whereby the

person who would ordinarily have the burden of proof in an argument attempts to
switch that burden to the other person

1. Bill: "I think that some people

have psychic powers."
2. Jill: "What is your proof?"
3. Bill: "No one has been able to
prove that people do not have psychic powers."
21.
"If many believe so, it is so."
22.

Argumentum Ad Populum

Fallacy of Interrogation
i. The question asked has a presupposition
which the answerer may wish to
deny, but which he/she would be accepting if he/she gave

anything that
would count as an answer.
1. Ex.) Did you stop beating your
wife?
a. Assuming that the
the husband initially beat his spouse
23.
False Analogy
s a faulty instance of the argument from analogy
24.
Hasty Generalization (Secundum Quid)
i. Drawing a conclusion based on a small
sample size, rather than looking at statistics that are much more
in line with the typical or average situation.
1. Ex.) My Asian friend is smart.
Therefore, all asians must be smart
25.
Straw Man
i. Occurs when a person disregards the other party's argument and
instead creates an extreme or distorted version of that argument and
attacks that
Ex) After X said that we should put more money into health and
education, Y responded by saying how he was surprised that X
hates our country so much that he wants to leave it defenseless
by cutting military spending
Ex) "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack
submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why
he wants to leave us defenseless like that."
26.

Illicit Process
i.

ii. A fallacy of distribution in which a term is distributed in a

conclusion that has not been distributed in the premises
1. Example 2
a. Land animals have
hipbones
b. No whales are land
animals
c. Therefore no whales have
hip bones
2. Example 3
a. Boy scouts are Brave
b. All Boy Scouts are thrifty
people
c. All thrifty people are brave

27.

Non-Sequitur
i. Conclusion does not follow its premise

ii. People generally like to walk on the beach. Beaches

have sand. Therefore, having sand floors in homes would be a great idea!

28.

Red Herring
i. mislead from irrelevant information
ii. Ex. Mike: It is morally wrong to cheat on your

spouse, why on earth would you have done that?

iii. Ken: But what is morality exactly?
iv. Mike: Its a code of conduct shared by cultures.
v. Ken: But who creates this code?...
vi.

29.
Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc
Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X."
30.

Quaternio Terminorum
i. Illogical syllogism with four unrelated terms,
rather than the normal three
1. Ex) All fish have fins, All goldfish
have fins, therefore all humans have fins. Illogical
because it tries to connect human with fins, with the
major and minor premises dont even mention humans.