Logical Fallacies - Churchwatch Central

 Found here. A helpful list, though a bit ironic. The website where this is found engages in some of the fallacies quite often. We shall make a post about that here. 

FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE		Arguments that are really distractions from the main point.
Ad Fontem Arguments (Arguments against source)		Arguments that distract by focusing attention on the source of the argument, rather than on the issue itself.
1.	Ad Hominem Abusive	Arguments that attempt to avoid the issue by insulting an opponent with abusive language.
2.	Ad Hominem Circumstantial	Arguments that try to discredit an opponent because of his background, affiliations, or self-interest in the matter at hand.
3.	To Quoque	Arguments that assume that a rival’s recommendation should be discounted because the rival does not always follow it himself.
4.	Genetic Fallacy	Arguments that state that an idea should be discounted simply because of its source or origin.
Appeals to Emotion		Arguments that attempt to sway the opinion of people by compelling them to feel emotions such as pity, anger, fear, joy, peer pressure, intimidation, etc.
5.	Appeal to Fear (ad baculum)	Arguments that distract by making the audience afraid of the consequences of disagreeing with the speaker.
6.	Appeal to Pity (ad misericordiam)	Arguments that distract by making the audience feel sorry for the speaker or someone on behalf of whom the speaker is arguing.
7.	Mob Appeal (ad populum)	Arguments that distract by making the audience want to be part of the crowd or one of the “common people”.
8.	Snob Appeal	Arguments that distract by making the audience want to feel “special”.
9.	Appeal to Illegitimate Authority (ad erecundiam)	Arguments that distract by attempting to shame the listener into agreement by citing an illegitimate authority.
10.	Chronological Snobbery	Arguments that distract by making the audience want to either be apart of an old tradition or of the latest cool, new thing.
Red Herrings		Arguments that make a more subtle appeal to emotion,  but include types of proofs that are irrelevant to the case at hand.
11.	Appeal to ignorance	Arguments that claim that since a proposition cannot be disproven, it must therefore be true or likely.
12.	Irrelevant Goals or Functions	Arguments that distract by measuring a plan or policy according to goals it wasn’t intended to achieve.
13.	Irrelevant Thesis	Arguments that distract by making a case for the wrong point.
14.	Straw Man Fallacy	Arguments that attempt to disprove an opponent’s position by presenting it in an unfair, inaccurate light.

FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION		Arguments that make unwarranted assumptions about either the data or the nature of a reasonable argument.
Fallacies of Presupposition		Arguments that contain hidden assumptions that make them unreasonable.
15.	Begging the Question (petitio principi)	Arguments that assume the very same thing that one is trying to prove.
16.	Bifurcation (False dilemma)	Arguments that frame the debate such that only two options are possible, when other possibilities may exist.
17.	Fallacy of Moderation	Arguments that assume the correct answer is always the middle ground or a compromise between two extremes.
18.	Is-Ought Fallacy	Arguments that assume that just because something is a certain way, it ought to be that way.
19.	Fallacy of Composition	Arguments based on a hidden assumption that the properties of the whole will be the same as the properties of the parts.
20.	Fallacy of Division	Arguments that are based on the hidden assumption that a collective whole determines that all of its parts will be like the whole.
Fallacies of Induction		Arguments that misuse empirical data or don’t follow proper methods of inductive reasoning.
21.	Sweeping Generalization (Accident)	Arguments that overextend a generalization to include facts or cases that are exceptions to it.
22.	Hasty Generalization (Converse Accident)	Arguments that make a generalization on the basis of too few samples.
23.	False Analogy	Arguments that fail because they create an analogy between things that are not similar enough to warrant an analogy.
24.	False Clause	Arguments that are based on a weak cause-and-effect connection.
25.	Fake Precision	Arguments that use numbers or statistics in a way that is too precise to be justified by a situation.

FALLACIES OF CLARITY		Arguments that fail because they contain words, phrases or syntax that distort or cloud their meanings.
26.	Equivocation	Arguments that fail because a key term is ambiguous.
27.	Accent	Arguments that rest on an improper emphasis placed on certain words or phrases.
28.	Distinction Without a Difference	Argument that make a linguistic distinction between two things that are actually not different from each other.

OTHER FALLACIES
28.	Ambiguous Assertion	a statement is made, but it is sufficiently unclear that it leaves some sort of leeway.
29.	Argument By Fast Talking	argument that relies on speed to go from one idea to the next so the audience won’t have time to think.
30.	Failure to state	if you make enough attacks, and ask enough questions, you may never have to actually define your own position on the topic.
31.	Appeal To Complexity	if the arguer doesn’t understand the topic, he concludes that nobody understands it. So, his opinions are as good as anybody’s.
32.	Argument By Laziness (Argument By Uninformed Opinion)	the arguer hasn’t bothered to learn anything about the topic. He nevertheless has an opinion, and will be insulted if his opinion is not treated with respect.
33.	Disproof By Fallacy	if a conclusion can be reached in an obviously fallacious way, then the conclusion is incorrectly declared wrong.
34.	False Compromise	if one does not understand a debate, it must be “fair” to split the difference, and agree on a compromise between the opinions.
35.	Pious Fraud	a fraud done to accomplish some good end, on the theory that the end justifies the means.
36.	Downplay fallacy (Appeal to corruption)	appealling to a low standard or diminishing one’s office, nature, integrity, virtue orposition to win an argument. Eg. “The president may have lied – but all politicians lie.”
37.	Antithesis backflip (Darkothesis)	a technique where someone reads the scripture (thesis); insists what the scripture does not say (antithesis); but smuggles the error into the antithesis which in turn flips the meaning of the original scripture to say something it doesn’t.
38.	Time Will Tell Fallacy (Appeal to time)	if the arguer doesn’t want to deal with an issue, he concludes that only time can be the answer. This can be used to shut down valid conversation.
39.	Curio-Fallacy (Appeal to curiosity)	if the arguer doesn’t want to deal with an issue, he asks enticing questions or airs his argument with mystical intrigue, thus appealing to his opponents curiosity. This can be used to shut down or mislead valid conversation. (Can be considered to be a type of red herring.)
39.	Deflection tactic (Appeal to relationship)	Built on the assumption that an individual’s personal charisma and charm are more important than an evaluation of their teachings and actions, this fallacy deflects the criticism by deflecting the issues raised and asking if the arguer personally knows the individual in question.