This document discusses common logic fallacies to avoid in apologetics discussions. It defines and provides examples of 13 different fallacies: hasty generalization, non-sequitur, begging the question, red herring, ad hominem, ad verecundiam, ad populum, bandwagon, either/or, misplaced concreteness, strawman, weak analogy, and cherry picking. It encourages being aware of logic fallacies and responding by addressing the fallacy directly to get the discussion back on track.

1. Avoiding Logic Fallacies
in Apologetics
TH363 Apologetics
CCBC-Montebelluna, Italy
Instructor: Rick Harrell, M.Div., M.A.

2. The “Hasty Generalization”
• Drawing a conclusion that is bigger than the evidence is you’ve presented.
• Creating a biased generalization that jumps beyond what you’ve made the
case for.
• The opposite is the “Sweeping Generalization” – giving a general principle
that fits specific situations without evidence to support it.
• Some of the buzz-phrases Christians use are not reasonable to a seeker.
• God said it, I believe it, that settles it.
• Everything will work out if you let go and let God.

3. The “Non-Sequitur”
• Drawing a conclusion that doesn’t fit the facts.
• Your main point “doesn’t follow” you presentation.
• Your facts may be correct, but your results don’t fit the logic.
• The “Post Hoc” is similar – this is true and causes that (but not logically.)
• Guilt is universal, God forgives, therefore everyone feels the need for God.
• I feel God when I sing, everyone loves music, every should feel God when they sing.

4. The “Begging the Question”
• The presenter gives a solution to a problem that has not yet been
acknowledged – it is an assumed fact due to it’s “fact-ness.”
• The seeker who doesn’t feel a need for forgiveness doesn’t need a solution.
• This is also called “circular reasoning” – it ignores that the seeker is not “in
the logic loop.”
• The reason you should accept Jesus is because He is the best thing around.
• God always speaks through dreams because He spoke to me in a dream.

5. The “Red Herring”
• The Red Herring is used to deflect a hard question or topic.
• This is the introduction of a non-related or barely related topic that moves
the conversation away from the original topic.
• The “Red Herring” is a favorite for “avoiding the issue.”
• The design of the world seems to point to a Creator. So, how do you even know there
is a God if you can’t see God? (Wait, did you answer the first question?)
• There is plenty of evidence that Jesus died and was resurrected. Wasn’t Jesus just a
“reincarnation” the Sun God Mithras?

6. The “Ad Hominem”
• This argument is also a “sleight of hand” tool to change the subject. It is
often mean-spirited.
• ”Ad hominem” means “to the man” – and it means to attack the character
of the man instead of address the argument. This is a popular scheme when
one has no real argument in response.
• The Bible tells us that, while we were still running from God, He loved us. “But you
and those other Christians are hateful toward those who disagree with you!”

7. The “Ad Verecundiam”
• This argument cites as the authority a source that isn’t valid for the answer.
• The other name for this fallacy is “Appeal to Authority” logic fallacy.
• The basis of this fallacy is that the authority isn’t final or absolute – but the
arguer defers to this authority anyway in hopes that the audience will buy it.
• Of course evolution is true and the Bible is false, Richard Dawkins says so.
• Of course the Bible is true and evolution is false, my pastor said so in a sermon.

8. The “Ad Populum”
• This argument is the “appeal to the masses (or the mob)” or “consensus”
fallacy.
• ”Ad populum” or “to the people” appeals to the segment of the world, or
cites a group, most likely to support the original argument.
• Don’t most theologians agree that all religions are basically the same – just pick one and
love everyone.
• I would go into missions, except the people in my church that said it might be
dangerous to do so.

9. The ”Bandwagon”
• Since everyone believes in this, then we should, too.
• You may recognize this from the “Ad Populum” fallacy, which appeals to
specific groups or people (Scientists say, my group says, etc.) The
“Bandwagon” is it’s “vague” cousin and appeals to general cultural beliefs.
• This is an appeal to a generic group that might back up a weak position.
• It just makes sense to deny the validity of the Bible, most everyone does.
• Can’t living together be a fair option for Christians in love, everyone does it.
• The people in that caravan just want a safe and better life, can’t we all agree with this?

10. The “Either/Or”
• This fallacious argument only offers two sides to the solution, both of which
favor his or her point of view.
• The “Either/Or” Argument sets two options that, if one is correct, the other
is false. Keep in mind that “or” isn’t always exclusive; sometimes, but not
always.
• This fallacy build absolutes where there may be grey areas.
• I can’t become a Christian, since they are all either “always right” or “hypocrites.”
• Jesus is either Lord of all, or He is not Lord at all.

11. The “Misplaced Concreteness”
• This is also called the “Abstraction” fallacy because it takes an idea or
abstract concept and makes it seem concrete and solidly real.
• Face it, we accept abstract ideas as important factors in our lives, and build
our goals and hopes on them. Most of them have to do with past assertions
that aren’t provable, or future hopes that may or may not be valid.
• Wars in the past helped cull out the overpopulation, so wars are a good thing.
• I can make my future whatever I want it to be.

12. The “Strawman”
• This fallacy cleverly “revises” and subsequently “demolishes” a point in an
argument in order to look victorious over the whole argument.
• The “Strawman” often focuses on the weakest aspect, the one that can
garner the most adversarial support (or laughter), and can best “put one in
one’s place.” The ”strawman” stands on the weak foundation of ridicule.
• Since you believe in the God of the Bible, that means you reject Science and ignore the
feelings and beliefs of 4 billion people.
• I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. Oh, so you hate gays.

13. The “Weak Analogy”
• This logical argument compares a point to something else that has little or
nothing to do with it.
• A “weak analogy” deflects the possibilities of an argument’s truth by
appealing to the absurd.
• Anyone who believes in miracles might just as well write a letter to Santa.
• People who believe in the resurrection of Jesus are just as valid as people who believe
in zombies.

14. The “Cherry Picking”
• This fallacy is also knows as the “Card Stacking” argument. The presenter
knows that there are arguments against his or her point, but only states those
for it.
• The “Cherry Picking” happens in order to strengthen a belief that could be
refuted – but in light of so many points in favor, he or she hopes to win the
day.
• Marijuana should be legal since it helps with pain management, leaves no hangover, and
will help the economy.

15. The “Oversimplification”
• This logic fallacy can happen when we want to win the argument quickly and
without much opposition.
• Some questions and issues in our world are complicated and the solutions
and answers are more sophisticated that we want to address.
• To avoid having to think deeply and argue well, we might oversimplify.
• Life would be good if we can just all get along and trust each other.
• Much war happens due to religious disputes; war will stop if we get rid of religions.

16. The “Slippery Slope”
• This is also known as the “Domino” fallacy. We might take one small fact, then
build a full case of negative outcomes against an argument.
• There is a place when we should argue from what potentially will follow, but we
can’t build absolutes when there are so many choices one could make
• Just as soon as I teach my kid to drive, he will back out over our mailbox, run a red light, get
chases by the cops and have to flee to Mexico as a fugitive.
• If we let that (name your group or person) serve or lead, church as we know it will end.
• If Jennifer sees her future self, it “could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very
fabric of the space-time continuum and destroy the entire universe!” (BTTF 2)

17. Responding to Fallacies
• Be aware that a weak, lightly considered, or unprepared argument may tempt
any of us to rely on a logic fallacy. Think before you go there.
• Be aware also that the person you speak with may, to avoid facing the
argument, choose to deflect by using a logic fallacy.
• Any fallacy can be the one that shuts the door to exploring truth and
considering a valid argument.
• Catch the logic fallacy at the beginning, address it, and discover if the person
means something else. Ask questions to get clarification? Do you mean?