Back in 2012 I was taking an online course in Analytical Thinking with Koinonia-Institute studying fallacies. As I worked on a list of fallacies it grew and grew.
Fallacies of Relevance - Errors that Don't Address the Issues.
Appeal to Force/ Fear – “Arguing for a position on the basis that negative consequences will follow if a person does not accept the position. Accept this argument or I'll beat you up!”
Today's liberal, "Use my pronouns or I'll beat you up/ sue you/ get you fired" an example.
Argumentum ad Hominem – “An argument that says "reject whatever he says because he is a bad person:"
An example of that “bad rich person" would be the 2012 presidential election and the methodology of discrediting Governor Romney because of his wealth is a great example of the use Argumentum ad Hominem against the rich.
Consensus Gentium - Accept this because the majority of people believe this is true. This is similar to Appeal to Popularity. It is based on the notion that if the majority believe something is right, it must be right.”
In addition to the brainwashing of young childred is the brainwashing of millions during and after the C-19 plandemic.
Inappropriate Authorities
Straw Man - When a person misrepresents his opponent's position and then proceeds to refute that misrepresentation: The fallacy is that it doesn't refute what the opponent actually believes.
This fallacy is used online like a matra by a local citizen and is in part my inspiration for revisiting this list.
Red Herring - Accept this argument because the other subject is interesting, funny, witty, etc.: The fallacy is that this simply evades the question by changing the subject and then proceeds as if the point had been made.
Success has been demonized, tax the rich!
Nothing Buttery - "Argues that something is "nothing but" some aspect of it: This fallacy is that it reduces a many faceted question down to a single point."
The Marta here is that the “Rich don’t pay their fair share.
Bifurcation I False Dilemma - Bifurcation means to divide something into two parts: The fallacy of bifurcation occurs when someone asserts that there are only two options open to someone when in reality there are more than two.
Implied that either the rich pay their fair share and the schools, etc. get funded or the Rich don’t pay their fair share and these services don’t get funded.
Appeal to Emotion - "Attempting to persuade using emotion: The fallacy is obviously that you can't base truth on emotion."
Other Informal Fallacies
Apriorism – “A priori is starting with a conclusion: To start out with conclusions first (a priori) and then use them to decide whether to accept certain facts is the wrong way around."
So here the starting conclusion is that “The rich don’t pay enough.”
Dismissal – “Adopting an attitude of superiority and dismissing an argument by stating something like "I won't dignify that with an answer." The fallacy is that while sometimes effective politically, it does nothing to change or challenge the facts." Progressives/ liberals often seem to be looking down their noses at the crass capitalists.
Humor or Ridicule – “Using humor to ridicule or distract the audience's attention or to ridicule the person or the argument of another: The fallacy of course is that while humor and ridicule may draw a positive response from one's audience, it is not a substitute for reasoned analysis and argument.”
Too many political cartoons to count.
Meaningless Claim – “When a person makes claims that by their nature, are impossible to verify or refute: Meaningless claims occur because someone uses vague or ambiguous language.”
Try asking a lib what percent of someone's income is fair to tax. Rarely is a direct answer offered.
Oversimplification – “Treating a situation as if it contained only a few relevant factors, when in reality, it contains many. Part of the problem of oversimplification of a situation is that we deprive ourselves of important information necessary to fully understand it.”
More and more critical thinking and common sense seems to be in decline. An example of limiting the sunlight while promoting solar panels.
Poisoning the Well – “Laying down an insult and saying that it applies to anyone who would be so foolish as to disagree: The fallacy is that they arbitrarily label all evidence from a different position as unsound, but with no logical basis for doing so.”
Why is it whenever someone wants to either raise more taxes or impose a union demand that children are always the alleged recipient of the benefit? If for one minute you disagree, then obviously you hate all children.
Special Pleading - When a person expects his opponent to abide by a particular standard when he himself does not, i.e., a double standard: The fallacy is that both should be held to the same standards.
In the United States we see this in politics where one party holds to a higher standard than the other party does. Israel is blamed by the UN if she defends herself while her enemies have free rein.
