This document defines and provides examples of common logical fallacies. It discusses straw man, bandwagon, post hoc ergo propter hoc, genetic, begging the claim, circular argument, either/or, ad hominem, and sorites fallacies. For each, it explains the fallacy and gives an example to illustrate the logical mistake. The purpose is to help identify flawed or invalid reasoning techniques.

1. LOGICAL FALLACIES
MISTAKES, SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY

2. EX: PERSON 1: TAKING HOT WATER SHOWER IS BENEFICIAL.
PERSON 2: HOT WATER MAY DAMAGE THE SKIN
PERSON 1: NO I DID’T MEAN EXTREMELY HOT WATER
THE STRAW MAN FALLACY
• This fallacy occurs when your opponent over-simplifies or misrepresents your argument
(i.e., setting up a "straw man") to make it easier to attack or refute. Instead of fully
addressing your actual argument, speakers relying on this fallacy present a superficially
similar — but ultimately not equal — version of your real stance, helping them create the
illusion of easily defeating you.

3. EXAMPLE: POPULARITY, MEDIA AND OPINION. WHILE MOST OF US EXPECT TO
SEE BANDWAGON ARGUMENTS IN ADVERTISING (E.G., "THREE OUT OF FOUR
PEOPLE THINK X BRAND TOOTHPASTE CLEANS TEETH BEST"), THIS FALLAC Y
CAN EASILY SNEAK ITS WAY INTO EVERYDAY MEETINGS AND CONVERSATION S.
BANDWAGON FALLACY
• Just because a significant population of people believe a proposition is true, doesn't
automatically make it true. Popularity alone is not enough to validate an argument, though
it's often used as a standalone justification of validity. Arguments in this style don't take
into account whether or not the population validating the argument is actually qualified to
do so, or if contrary evidence exists.

4. EX: I DRANK BOTTLED WATER AND NOW I AM SICK, SO THE WATER MUST H AVE
MADE ME SICK.
POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC:
• This is a conclusion that assumes that if 'A' occurred after 'B' then 'B' must have caused
‘A.'
• In this example, the author assumes that if one event chronologically follows another the
first event must have caused the second. But the illness could have been caused by the
burrito the night before, a flu bug that had been working on the body for days, or a
chemical spill across campus. There is no reason, without more evidence, to assume the
water caused the person to be sick.

5. EXAMPLE:
THE VOLKSWAGEN BEETLE IS AN EVIL CAR BECAUSE IT WAS ORIGINALLY
DESIGNED BY HITLER'S ARMY.
GENETIC FALLACY
• This conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or
theory determine its character, nature, or worth.
• In this example the author is equating the character of a car with the character of the
people who built the car. However, the two are not inherently related.

6. EX: FILTHY AND POLLUTING COAL SHOULD BE BANNED
BEGGING THE CLAIM
• The conclusion that the writer should prove is validated within the claim. Example:
• Arguing that coal pollutes the earth and thus should be banned would be logical.
But the very conclusion that should be proved, that coal causes enough pollution
to warrant banning its use, is already assumed in the claim by referring to it as
"filthy and polluting."

7. EX: GEORGE BUSH IS AN EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATOR BECAUSE HE SPEAKS
EFFECTIVELY
CIRCULAR ARGUMENT
• This restates the argument rather than actually proving it.
• In this example, the conclusion that Bush is a "good communicator" and the evidence
used to prove it "he speaks effectively" are basically the same idea. Specific evidence
such as using everyday language, breaking down complex problems, or illustrating his
points with humorous stories would be needed to prove either half of the sentence.

8. EX:EITHER WE STOP USING CARS OR DESTROY THE EARTH
EITHER/OR
• This is a conclusion that oversimplifies the argument by reducing it to only two sides or
choices.
• In this example, the two choices are presented as the only options, yet the author
ignores a range of choices in between such as developing cleaner technology, car-
sharing systems for necessities and emergencies, or better community planning to
discourage daily driving.

9. EX: PLEASE DON’T BELIEVE WHAT HE SAYS BECAUSE HE DRINKS AND SMOK ES;
HE IS A BAD PERSON
AD HOMINEM
• Ad hominem: This is an attack on the character of a person rather than his or her opinions
or arguments.
• Another Example:Green Peace's strategies aren't effective because they are all dirty, lazy
hippies.
• In this example, the author doesn't even name particular strategies Green Peace has
suggested, much less evaluate those strategies on their merits. Instead, the author
attacks the characters of the individuals in the group.

10. SORITES
• The propositions are so formed that, the predicate of the first argument forms the subject
of the next argument and the conclusion joins the subject of the first with the predicate of
the last. These are called sorites
• Ex: Don Scotus is a theologian cum philosopher. A philosopher is one who thinks logically
sound and a theologian is one who studies religion and presents arguments about God.
Therefore Don Scotus thinks logically sound, studies religion and presents arguments
about God.

11. REFERENCES - INTERNET. MANY
MORE FALLACIES ARE THERE.
WILL UPDATE SOON.