Note: skip the following fallacies:

Barnum effect
IKEA effect
Gambler's fallacy
Cluster Illusion
Tachypsychia
decision point
fallacy
Genetic Fallacy
No true scotsman
Chesterton’s
Fence
Middle ground
fallacy

1. Fallacy of composition
Just because there might be great or bad parts to a whole, such parts in themselves
doesn’t make the whole great or bad by default. For maximum dramatic effect,
journalists are typically decided on whether something should be put on a pedestal or
brought down. Therefore, they will be biased towards stories that fit with the reigning
narrative — a sort of amplification of the agenda-setting theory.

“We’ve got the best player in the world on our team, so we must also have the best
team in the world.”

2. Fallacy of division
Just because something is true for the whole, that doesn’t also make it true for the
parts. This is the opposite to the fallacy of composition. For instance, just because a
religion as a whole are advocating peace and kindness, that doesn’t mean that
significant parts of the religion can’t be violent.

“We’ve got the best team in the world, so naturally we must also have the best
individual players in the world.”

3. The gambler’s fallacy

The gambler’s fallacy is connected with our tendency to believe that there are such
things as streaks of good or bad luck. In retrospect, we can detect streaks in results
given by chance, but there’s no statistical governance operating behind such streaks.

“I should place another bet, because I’m on a roll right now!”

4. Tu quoque (who are you to talk?)

We can sometimes tell ourselves that a piece of advice is factually incorrect based on
who we originally heard the advice from. Just because someone makes a statement
that is outside of their expertise, this doesn’t make the actual statement untrue by
default. You should be mindful of the fallacious appeal to authority, of course, but you
shouldn’t jump to conclusions.

“My friend said it’s great to go to the gym, but my friend is out of shape, so that can’t
be good advice.”

5. Strawman
A strawman argument is when your opponent grossly misrepresents the intended
meaning of your original meaning or position. Strawman arguments seems to be
increasingly popular in social media where you often have to describe your
opponent’s position yourself before attacking it — and it might be tempting to
misrepresent your opponent’s position. The opposite of the strawman argument is the
steelman argument where you actually improve on your opponent’s argument.

“Atheists don’t believe in anything so they don’t believe it matters if one does bad
things.”

6. Ad hominem
Instead of attacking the arguments, you attack the person. This is typically an effort to
undermine any arguments by ignoring them and instead attacking the person’s good
name or character.

“Our prime minister’s wife left him, and if he can’t keep a wife happy, how could he
run our country?”

7. Genetic fallacy (fallacy of origin or

fallacy of virtue)
To assume that something is correct or incorrect based solely on the credibility of the
source.

“My priest wouldn’t lie to me and my priest is telling me that God exists, so therefore
God must exist.”

8. Fallacious appeal to authority

Just because someone’s an expert in some area, this doesn’t automatically make them
an expert in other areas as well. The news media very much favours trusted experts to
come back to comment on areas further and further away from their actual area of
expertise.
“I’m not an epidemiologist, however, I am a doctor, and I think we must take
measures to ensure herd immunity.”

9. Red herring
Offering a piece of information which is irrelevant for the main point with the
intention to mislead or distract.

“Many people are campaigning for the environment, but I think that we must tackle
unemployment and make sure that we take better care of our homeless.”

10. Appeal to emotion

An attempt to distract you by making you feel bad for someone while anyone’s
emotional state is irrelevant to the cause at hand. As human beings, we often find it
hard to defend ourselves against people or groups of people claiming to be sad, hurt,
or scared.

“Are you sure that you want to blame these immigrants when they’re clearly suffering
from their past experiences.”

11. Appeal to popularity (the bandwagon

effect)
The false belief that a lot of people can’t be wrong about the same thing at the same
time. Both logic and history has taught us that majorities can be objectively wrong,
but it’s socially comforting to remind your opponent that you have the majority
position on your side — which makes your position correct by default.

“One billion flies can’t be wrong — eat shit.”

12. Appeal to tradition
The false belief that a lot of people can’t be wrong about something for a very long
time. Just because human beings have been religious throughout our history, this fact
in of itself doesn’t proof the existence of supernatural powers.

“This simply can’t be wrong since this has been common practice forever.”

13. Appeal to nature

The misleading concept that science are at odds with nature and that you therefore
shouldn’t trust science. Just because we’ve evolved in unison with nature without
vaccines, this fact doesn’t automatically make vaccines dangerous.

“We trust in safekeeping our natural immune systems and therefore we don’t trust in
vaccines.”

14. Appeal to ignorance

The misconception that if you can’t prove something to be false, then it must be true.

“Since God can’t be disproven, God must exist.”

15. Begging the question

To use a circular argument; any form of argument where the conclusion is assumed in
one of the premises.

“God exists because it says so in the Bible.”

16. Equivocation
To use words of multiple meanings interchangeably to gain the upper hand in an
argument.

“I have the right to believe in God; therefore, believing in God is right.”

17. False dichotomy (black or white)

Assuming that something must be either A or B and not both, nor neither. The media
logic often dictates that narratives must be simplified and amplified to be easier to
quickly understand; as soon as something is two or more things simultaneously, we
tend to find this hard to wrap our heads around. A person could be good or bad at the
same time — or neither.

“You’re either with us (on everything), or you’re against us (on everything).”

18. Middle ground fallacy

The false notion that any right answer must lie somewhere in between extreme
positions. If someone says that the water is cold and someone else says it’s hot, it’s
easy to assume that the temperature is likely to be somewhere in between. But it could
still be really hot — or really cold.

“Someone said that this is really dangerous and someone said that this is perfectly
safe, so as long as I’m cautious, I should be fine.”

19. Decision point fallacy (Sorites paradox)

The false assumption that something can’t be correct or incorrect because there’s no
precise cut-off between two points. This is a fallacy we’re seeing in the news media
connected to the coronavirus pandemic all the time; since we can’t say which precise
number of deaths is good or bad, many argue that we can’t say anything about any
number.

“We haven’t had lots of pandemic deaths in Sweden because we know of other
countries who clearly have had lots of deaths — and since we haven’t had as many as
those countries, we clearly haven’t had lots of deaths.”

20. Slippery slope fallacy

The false assumption that one step in a certain direction is bound to lead to many steps
in that same direction. Sure, eating a piece of candy could lead to an increased
consumption of sugar which could lead to a serious disease which ultimately could
cost you your life. But eating a piece of candy won’t lead directly to your death.

“If you eat that sandwich you’re going to get fat.”

21. Hasty generalisations (anecdotes)

When someone draws very general conclusions based on a very small subset of
subjective circumstances. We are often quick to draw generalised conclusions based
on anecdotal evidence, especially if those circumstances are individual.

“I got mugged in the street yesterday and I hate the fact that society is becoming
increasingly more unsafe.”

22. Faulty analogy

The attempt to disqualify an argument by making a point using an irrelevant analogy.
Analogies can be powerful communication tools, but it’s also easy to make
comparisons that simply aren’t fair or accurate.
“Abortion is murder.”

23. Burden of proof

The attempt to push the opponent to disprove your claims. It’s the person making the
claim who has the burden of proof, but a popular technique is to push the
responsibility over at the person you’re arguing against.

“I believe in God and you must prove me wrong to change my mind.”

24. Affirming the consequent

Just because an if-then statement is true in a certain situation, this doesn’t make the if-
then statement true in all situations.

“A cat meows, so everything that meows is a cat.”

25. Denying the antecedent (fallacy of the

inverse)
If a statement with specific conditions is correct, this doesn’t make the statement
correct or incorrect for all other types of conditions.

“A cat meows, so if it doesn’t meow, then it isn’t a cat.”

26. Moving the goalposts

Manipulating the argument by changing the specifics of your initial claims — after
being questioned or even proven wrong.
Demanding from an opponent that he or she address more and more points
after the initial counter-argument has been satisfied refusing to concede or
accept the opponent’s argument.

“Yes, there might be some innocent people in jail, but I was only talking about the
ones who actually did committed their crimes.”

27. No true Scotsman

To disqualify someone or something based on a false or biased ideal.

” All real men have beards, so if you don’t have a beard, then you can’t be a real
man.”

28. Personal incredulity

Just because you find something hard to believe or imagine, that in itself doesn’t make
it untrue.

“I can’t believe that the universe and everything in it arose from nothing, so it can’t
be true.”

29. False Causality

The false assumption that correlation equals causation.

“Crime rates went up when the price of gas went up, so for the sake of everyone’s
safety, we must lower our taxes on fossil fuels.”

30. Texas sharpshooter

To decide on your position and then go out to find only data to support that position
— and no other position. This fallacy is especially prominent in this digital age of
ours, when it’s possible to go online to find arguments defending almost any
imaginable position.

“I’ve found numerous studies supporting my position and I have no idea if there are
any studies supporting your position as well.”

31. Loaded question

To ask a question with an assumption already built into the question.

“Have you stopped beating your wife?”

32. Chesterton’s Fence

If we don’t understand or see the reason for something, we might be inclined to do
away with it. However, even if we at first don’t understand it, most things have been
put in place for a reason. We should therefore leave it be unless we fully understand
its purpose.

“There’s a fence here, but I can’t really see what it’s good for, so let’s do away with
it.”

Source: https://doctorspin.org/science/psychology/logical-fallacies/#BN-20125f1ece6e2