False Dichotomy – presenting only two options when more exist

Appeal to Authority – citing authority instead of evidence

Appeal to Emotion – using feelings in place of facts

Ad Hominem – attacking the person instead of the claim

Strawman – misrepresenting an argument to make it weaker

Red Herring – diverting attention to an irrelevant issue

Circular Reasoning – the conclusion is used as its own evidence

Correlation = Causation – assuming cause from correlation

Cherry Picking – selecting only data that supports a claim

Confirmation Bias – interpreting information to match belief

Moving the Goalposts – changing standards after proof is shown

Unfalsifiable Claim – cannot be tested or proven false

Anecdotal Evidence – personal story replacing data

Survivorship Bias – focusing on winners, ignoring failures

Statistical Misrepresentation – misleading use of numbers

Loaded Language – emotionally-charged wording to sway opinion

False Equivalence – comparing two unrelated things as equal

Ambiguity – using vague wording to avoid precision

Non Sequitur – conclusion doesn’t follow the premises

Appeal to Popularity – “many believe it” therefore true

Appeal to Tradition – “it’s always been done this way”

Appeal to Novelty – new = better without evidence

Shifting Burden of Proof – demanding others disprove your claim

Overgeneralization – broad conclusions from small samples

Slippery Slope – claiming small step leads to extreme outcome

Inconsistent Standards – applying different rules per case

Unsupported Assertion – claim without evidence

Pseudo-Technical Language – jargon without real meaning

Motivated Reasoning – conclusion decided before evidence

Gaslighting – denying observable reality to confuse

False Precision – over-detailed numbers to imply accuracy

Selective Omission – leaving out relevant context

Hidden Premise – unstated assumption required for argument

Conflicting Claims – contradicting statements in same argument

Appeal to Fear – using threat to secure compliance

Appeal to Hope – promising unrealistic positive outcomes

Immunity to Correction – no evidence can change the claim

Overreliance on Analogies – analogy replaces actual proof

Appeal to Personal Experience – “I saw it, so it’s true”

False Urgency – artificial time pressure

Complexity Illusion – sounding complicated to appear correct

Appeal to Conspiracy – lack of proof explained by cover-up

Emotional Blackmail – guilt or shame used instead of logic

Framing Bias – meaning changes by how info is presented

Unreplicable Results – results cannot be reproduced

Overconfidence Bias – certainty without justification

Pattern Seeking Error – seeing patterns in randomness

Appeal to Nature – natural = good or true

Appeal to Science (without science) – invoking science without data

Source Opacity – unclear or untraceable origin of information

Fake Consensus – illusion of widespread agreement

No Operational Definition – undefined key terms

Incentive Conflict – speaker benefits directly from belief

False Baseline – incorrect starting reference point

Out-of-Context Quote – altering meaning by cropping context

Authority Borrowing – adjacent credential used to validate unrelated claim

Illusory Truth Effect – repeated claim becomes believable

Data Dredging – searching data to find any supporting pattern

Technical Name Fallacy – labeling makes it seem real

One-Way Transparency – you must be open, they won’t

Inconsistent Timeline – events don’t line up chronologically

Appeal to Ignorance – claims true because not disproved

Reframing After Failure – redefining success after loss

Social Proof Manipulation – fake or inflated endorsements

Authority Without Accountability – no review or oversight

False Modesty – downplaying status while implying superiority

Quantifier Abuse – words like “always,” “never,” “everyone”

Scale Manipulation – changing units to obscure meaning

Visual Misrepresentation – misleading charts or visuals

Reality Drift – subtle story changes over time

Outcome Bias – judging outcomes over methods

Reverse Victimhood – attacker frames themselves as victim

Narrative Substitution – story replacing data

Appeal to Scarcity – limited supply to push decision

Implied Consensus – “experts agree” without naming any

Logic Stack Gaps – missing steps in reasoning

Authority Masquerade – fake credentials or institutions

Overfitting – theory explains everything perfectly (too perfectly)

Social Pressure – “smart people agree with me”

Platform Abuse – using reach as proof of truth