So what is Logical fallacy?
Logical fallacy properly refers to a formal fallacy: a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid.
This fallacy comes in many forms
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact.
Appeal to Authority
This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject.
Appeal to Belief
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the fact that many people believe a claim does not, in general, serve as evidence that the claim is
Appeal to Common Practice
It is a fallacy because the mere fact that most people do something does not make it correct, moral, justified, or reasonable.
Appeal to Consequences of a Belief
The nature of the fallacy is especially clear in the case of Wishful thinking. Obviously, merely wishing that something is true does not make it
Appeal to Emotion
This fallacy is committed when someone manipulates peoples' emotions in order to get them to accept a claim as being true. More formally, this sort
of "reasoning" involves the substitution of various means of producing strong emotions in place of evidence for a claim.
Appeal to Fear
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because creating fear in people does not constitute evidence for a claim.
Appeal to Flattery
The basic idea behind this fallacy is that flattery is presented in the place of evidence for accepting a claim. this sort of "reasoning" is
fallacious because flattery is not, in fact, evidence for a claim.
Appeal to Novelty
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the novelty or newness of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something
Appeal to Pity
An Appeal to Pity is a fallacy in which a person substitutes a claim intended to create pity for evidence in an argument. This line of "reasoning"
is fallacious because pity does not serve as evidence for a claim.
Appeal to Spite
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because a feeling of spite does not count as evidence for or against a claim.
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because peer pressure and threat of rejection do not constitute evidence for rejecting a claim.
Begging the Question
Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the
conclusion is true.
Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on
it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is
assumed to be true unless proven otherwise
Guilt By Association
Guilt by Association is a fallacy in which a person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people they dislikes accept the claim.
A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of
"reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself.
The person committing Special Pleading is claiming that he is exempt from certain principles or standards yet he provides no good reason for his
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented
version of that position.
Who needs logic?