Logical Fallacy Bingo Logo

Chronological Snobbery
(wiki)
Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
(wiki)
Fallacy fallacy
(wiki)
Appeal to Probability
(wiki)
Thought terminating cliche
(wiki)
Naturalistic Fallacy
(wiki)
False Dilemma
(wiki)
Nirvana Fallacy
(wiki)
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc
(wiki)
Ludic Fallacy
(wiki)
Fallacy of Many Questions
(wiki)
Appeal to Motive
(wiki)
Dodge the question
(basically free)
Inconsistent Comparison
(wiki)
Poisoning the well
(wiki)
Appeal to Spite
(wiki)
Appeal to Hypocrisy
(wiki)
Hasty Generalization
(wiki)
Misleading Vividness
(wiki)
Moving the Goalposts
(wiki)
Cherry Picking
(wiki)
Historian's Fallacy
(wiki)
Retrospective Determinism
(wiki)
Appeal to Consequences
(wiki)
Association Fallacy
(wiki)

Your Fallacies:
  1. Chronological Snobbery (wiki): Where a thesis is deemed incorrect because it was commonly held when something else, clearly false, was also commonly held.
  2. Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy (wiki): Improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data that the larger data set does not support.
  3. Fallacy fallacy (wiki): Assumes that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself is false.
  4. Appeal to Probability (wiki): Assumes that because something is likely to happen, it is inevitable that it will happen.
  5. Thought terminating cliche (wiki): A commonly used phrase, sometimes passing as folk wisdom, used to quell cognitive dissonance, conceal lack of thought-entertainment, move onto other topics etc. but in any case, end the debate with a cliche, not a point.
  6. Naturalistic Fallacy (wiki): Attempts to prove a claim about ethics by appealing to a definition of the term -good- in terms of either one or more claims about natural properties.
  7. False Dilemma (wiki): Two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.
  8. Nirvana Fallacy (wiki): When solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect.
  9. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc (wiki): A faulty assumption that correlation between two variables implies that one causes the other.
  10. Ludic Fallacy (wiki): The belief that the outcomes of a non-regulated random occurrences can be encapsulated by a statistic; a failure to take into account unknown unknowns in determining the probability of an event's taking place.
  11. Fallacy of Many Questions (wiki): Someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved (loaded question).
  12. Appeal to Motive (wiki): Where a premise is dismissed by calling into question the motives of its proposer.
  13. Dodge the question (basically free): Lets talk about something else.
  14. Inconsistent Comparison (wiki): Where different methods of comparison are used, leaving one with a false impression of the whole comparison.
  15. Poisoning the well (wiki): A type of ad hominem where adverse information about a target is presented with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says.
  16. Appeal to Spite (wiki): A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party.
  17. Appeal to Hypocrisy (wiki): The argument states that a certain position is false or wrong and/or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position.
  18. Hasty Generalization (wiki): Basing a broad conclusion on a small sample.
  19. Misleading Vividness (wiki): Involves describing an occurrence in vivid detail, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, to convince someone that it is a problem.
  20. Moving the Goalposts (wiki): Argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.
  21. Cherry Picking (wiki): Act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.
  22. Historian's Fallacy (wiki): Occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision.
  23. Retrospective Determinism (wiki): The argument that because some event has occurred, its occurrence must have been inevitable beforehand.
  24. Appeal to Consequences (wiki): The conclusion is supported by a premise that asserts positive or negative consequences from some course of action (If P, then Q will occur. Q is desirable. Therefore, P is true. ).
  25. Association Fallacy (wiki): Arguing that because two things share a property they are the same. Commonly guilt by association or honor by association.

Show All Fallacies
About
Generate a New Card