Many people love a good debate across a variety of topics. It can be stimulating and even educational when done correctly and intelligently. But sometimes, we might fall into traps in our arguments, called logical fallacies. These are mistakes in reasoning that can weaken our arguments or make them downright invalid. So, let’s dive into 12 common logical fallacies lurking in our conversations.
What are the 12 kinds of fallacies?
1. Appeal to authority or Ad Verecundiam
2. Begging the question or circular reasoning
3. Hasty Generalization
4. Argument against the Person or Ad Hominem
5. Appeal to Emotion
6. Appeal to Ignorance
7. Alphabet Soup
8. Slippery Slope
9. Red Herring
10. Strawman
11. False Dilemma
12. Appeal to People or Bandwagon
Now let’s examine what each one means and how to avoid being fooled by them.
1. Appeal to Authority or Ad Verecundiam
The appeal to authority fallacy occurs when someone relies on an expert’s opinion to support their argument without critically examining its validity. While expertise can be valuable, experts are not infallible, and their opinions should not be accepted as conclusive proof. This fallacy assumes that because someone is an authority in one field, their opinion must be correct, even if the issue is outside their expertise or there is insufficient evidence to support their claim.
Suppose a group of friends is discussing the safety of a new roller coaster at an amusement park. One friend, Susan, argues that the ride must be safe because a celebrity recently tried and enjoyed it.
Susan: “If the celebrity went on the ride and had a great time, it must be safe. After all, they wouldn’t risk their life on something dangerous.”
In this example, Susan commits the appeal to authority fallacy by using the celebrity’s experience as evidence for the roller coaster’s safety. The celebrity may be an expert in their field (e.g., acting, music), but that doesn’t make them an expert on roller coaster safety. Just because a famous person enjoyed the ride does not mean it is safe for everyone. Susan’s argument relies on the celebrity’s status rather than on actual evidence or expert knowledge about the roller coaster’s safety.
2. Begging the Question or Circular Reasoning
Begging the question occurs when we assume the very thing we’re trying to prove. Essentially, our argument goes in circles. For instance, if we claim that “the billionaire is greedy because they have so much money,” we’re not providing any evidence, just rephrasing the initial statement.
3. Hasty Generalization
We make a hasty generalization when we draw conclusions based on insufficient evidence or a small sample size. Suppose we meet three rude New Yorkers and conclude that “all New Yorkers are rude.” In this case, we’re making a sweeping statement based on limited encounters.
4. Argument against the Person or Ad Hominem
Ad hominem attacks focus on a person’s character instead of addressing their argument. It’s like saying, “You can’t trust John’s opinion on business management because he’s a smoker.” John’s smoking habits do not affect his understanding of business management, so attacking his character is irrelevant.
5. Appeal to Emotion
Using emotions to manipulate an audience is known as an appeal to emotion. For instance, a politician might use heart-wrenching stories to gain support for a policy, even if it’s not the most rational choice. While emotions are a natural part of life, they shouldn’t be the sole basis for decisions.
6. Appeal to Ignorance
Appeal to ignorance occurs when we argue that something must be true because it hasn’t been proven false (or vice versa). For example, if we claim that “there’s no evidence that extraterrestrial life doesn’t exist, so aliens must be real,” we fall into this fallacy.
7. Alphabet Soup
The alphabet soup is when we use acronyms, jargon, or complex language to make our argument seem more convincing. Consider someone who says, “The GTR-5 protocol supports our findings because it incorporates the PQR-17 analysis.” Without context, it’s a confusing mix of letters and numbers that doesn’t prove anything.
8. Slippery Slope
The slippery slope fallacy assumes that small actions will lead to increasingly negative consequences without providing evidence. For example, if we argue that “legalizing marijuana will lead to the legalization of all drugs and the collapse of society,” we’re using a slippery slope argument.
9. Red Herring
The red herring fallacy occurs when someone introduces an irrelevant or unrelated point to distract from the discussed issue. The purpose of this tactic is to divert attention away from the main argument and steer the conversation in a different direction. This fallacy is named after the practice of using a strong-smelling, smoked fish, a “red herring,” to distract hunting dogs from their intended trail.
Imagine two coworkers, Alice and Bob, discussing the issue of workplace productivity.
Alice: “We must implement a better system to manage our projects and deadlines. Our current method is disorganized and leads to confusion.”
Bob: “But you know, Alice, the real problem is that the office coffee machine is always out of order. We can’t focus without caffeine!”
In this example, Bob introduces the unrelated issue of the coffee machine to distract from Alice’s argument about the need for better project management. The malfunctioning coffee machine may be a concern, but it does not address improving productivity through better organization. By bringing up the coffee machine, Bob uses the red herring fallacy to divert attention from Alice’s point.
10. Strawman
In the strawman fallacy, we misrepresent or exaggerate an opponent’s argument to make it easier to refute. If someone argues for better public transport and we respond, “You just want to ban all cars and force everyone onto buses,” we’re creating a strawman.
11. False Dilemma
A false dilemma is when we present only two options, implying that no other alternatives exist. For example, if we claim that “you’re either with us or against us,” we ignore the possibility that someone could be neutral or have a different perspective. By limiting the choices, we’re creating an artificial dilemma.
12. Appeal to People or Bandwagon
The bandwagon fallacy assumes it must be true because many people believe something. Consider the statement, “Everyone is switching to Brand X, so it must be the best.” Popularity doesn’t necessarily indicate quality or truth, so jumping on the bandwagon isn’t always the best move.
Key Takeaways
- Be cautious of relying solely on expert opinions (Appeal to Authority)
- Avoid circular arguments that lack evidence (Begging the Question)
- Don’t conclude based on insufficient data (Hasty Generalization)
- Focus on arguments, not personal attacks (Ad Hominem)
- Keep emotions in check when making decisions (Appeal to Emotion)
- Refrain from basing arguments on a lack of evidence (Appeal to Ignorance)
- Steer clear of using jargon to confuse or impress (Alphabet Soup)
- Resist making unsupported claims of dire consequences (Slippery Slope)
- Stay on topic and avoid distractions (Red Herring)
- Represent opponents’ arguments fairly (Strawman)
- Consider all possible options, not just two (False Dilemma)
- Don’t assume popularity equals truth (Appeal to People)
Conclusion
Knowing these 12 common logical fallacies can help us improve our critical thinking skills and engage in more fruitful discussions. Recognizing and avoiding these pitfalls, we’ll be better equipped to build solid and rational arguments and spot faulty reasoning in others’ claims. So the next time we find ourselves in a debate or conversation, let’s keep these fallacies in mind and strive for clarity, fairness, and truth.
