Bias and fallacies are both types of errors:
Bias
Biases are common ways our minds work that can make it hard to think clearly. They come from our personal feelings and can affect what we believe. For instance, reactance is a bias that makes us want to do the opposite of what someone tells us to do. This can sometimes get in the way of being fair and thinking logically.
A fallacy is a type of mistake in how we think, different from factual errors. Fallacies are about how we explain or back up our beliefs. For example, if we say, "I ate ice cream yesterday and now my stomach hurts, so the ice cream must be the cause," that's an example of a fallacy. It's a way of thinking that's not quite right.
1. Confirmation Bias 🔄
- DEFINITION: Confirmation bias is the inclination to seek, interpret, and remember information in a way that supports preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.
- Example 1: A person who firmly believes in ancient Indian technological advancements might view a discredited text like 'vymaanika shaastra' as proof of flying technology.
- Example 2: Reading only news sources that align with one's political views and dismissing contrary information.
- Example 3: Interpreting ambiguous feedback from a supervisor as positive because it aligns with the belief that one is a highly skilled worker.
2. Anecdotal Evidence
- DEFINITION: Anecdotal evidence involves using personal experiences as a basis for supporting an idea or claim.
- Example 1: Someone claiming that Ayurveda cured their childhood asthma, using their own experience as evidence.
- Example 2: Believing a particular diet is effective because a friend lost weight while following it.
- Example 3: Arguing that a specific meditation technique is the best because it personally led to feelings of calmness and clarity.
3. Research not provided
- DEFINITION: This fallacy occurs when an argument necessitates research but fails to provide any supporting evidence.
- Example 1: Making unverified claims about medical or dietary matters without presenting relevant research.
- Example 2: Asserting that a particular teaching method is superior without citing studies on its effectiveness.
- Example 3: Claiming a new technology is revolutionary without providing data on its capabilities.
4. Appeal to Tradition
- DEFINITION: This fallacy involves using cultural or traditional reasoning to back up an argument or claim.
- Example 1: Justifying the efficacy of certain medicines based on the fact that they have been used by ancestors for generations.
- Example 2: Insisting on following outdated and potentially harmful practices in agriculture due to their longstanding tradition.
- Example 3: Arguing that a particular style of clothing is superior because it has been worn for centuries.
5. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
- DEFINITION: This fallacy assumes that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second.
- Example 1: Believing that a person's recovery was solely due to a specific medicine because they took it before getting better.
- Example 2: Assuming that a lucky charm brought success in an exam simply because it was worn during the study period.
- Example 3: Believing that a rain dance ritual caused rainfall because it happened before a storm.
6. Bad Research
- DEFINITION: This refers to relying on poorly reviewed, non-peer-reviewed, or inadequately published research.
- Example 1: Citing questionable studies in support of diet or medicine claims.
- Example 2: Using a blog post as the primary source of information in a scientific argument.
- Example 3: Relying on a self-published book for information about climate change instead of peer-reviewed studies.
7. Appeal to Emotion
DEFINITION: This fallacy involves manipulating emotions to support an argument rather than presenting factual evidence.
- Example 1: Using emotional pleas rather than logical reasoning to validate a belief.
- Example 2: Evoking fear to promote a particular political agenda without providing substantive data.
- Example 3: Using heart-wrenching anecdotes to argue for a specific social policy without considering its broader implications.
8. Rationalisation
- DEFINITION: Rationalisation occurs when someone makes a decision and then finds a reason to justify that decision, often subconsciously.
- Example 1: Opting for Ayurveda and subsequently extolling its effectiveness.
- Example 2: Deciding to purchase an expensive item and then convincing oneself that it's a necessary investment.
- Example 3: Choosing a particular career path and then retrospectively constructing reasons for the decision.
9. Black and White Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy presents only two extreme options as if there are no other alternatives.
- Example 1: Assuming that a choice is limited to either matter being exclusively a wave or a particle.
- Example 2: Believing that people are either entirely good or entirely evil without considering nuances in behaviour.
- Example 3: Insisting that a complex social issue can only be solved by either complete deregulation or strict government control.
10. Middle Ground Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This occurs when someone asserts that the truth lies in between two extremes without providing evidence for this assertion.
- Example 1: Encouraging a middle-ground approach without substantiating its validity.
- Example 2: Arguing that the ideal tax rate must be somewhere in between 0% and 100% without offering empirical data to support the claim.
- Example 3: Suggesting that a compromise between two conflicting political parties is the best solution without providing specific policy recommendations.
11. Fear Mongering
- DEFINITION: Fear mongering entails creating unnecessary fear about a particular item, often related to food or medicine, without substantial evidence.
- Example 1: Declaring sugar to be a poison without providing convincing proof.
- Example 2: Spreading unfounded rumours about the dangers of a new technology without empirical data to support the claims.
- Example 3: Exaggerating the potential risks of a specific medical treatment without providing robust scientific evidence.
12. False Analogy 🔄
- DEFINITION: This fallacy involves comparing two things and asserting that because one is a certain way, the other must be as well.
- Example 1: Comparing the existence of electrons (supported by evidence) with the existence of God (lacking empirical evidence).
- Example 2: Arguing that just as a car engine requires a creator, so does the universe, without providing empirical evidence for either claim.
- Example 3: Asserting that the growth of a business is similar to the growth of a plant, and therefore they must face similar challenges, without empirical data to support the analogy.
13. Oversimplification
- DEFINITION: Oversimplification occurs when complex concepts are reduced to overly simple explanations, often disregarding important nuances.
- Example 1: Claiming that all sugar should be avoided due to its potential link to heart disease, overlooking intricacies.
- Example 2: Asserting that a complex economic issue can be solved with a single policy change, without considering the broader implications.
- Example 3: Arguing that a social problem can be entirely attributed to a single cause, without acknowledging the multifaceted nature of the issue.
14. Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence
- DEFINITION: This principle states that extraordinary assertions demand substantial evidence for validation.
- Example 1: Demanding strong evidence for extraordinary claims before accepting them as true.
- Example 2: Requiring extensive scientific evidence for a purported breakthrough in perpetual motion machines before accepting its validity.
- Example 3: Insisting on rigorous proof for claims of supernatural phenomena before accepting them as factual.
15. Just Universe Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy assumes that all good and bad deeds in the universe will ultimately balance out over time.
- Example 1: Believing that the positive actions of gurus outweigh any deceptive practices they may engage in.
- Example 2: Assuming that if someone has experienced a series of unfortunate events, they must be due for a stroke of good luck soon.
- Example 3: Believing that a person's success is directly proportional to their moral character, without considering external factors.
16. Using Science to Justify Beliefs
- DEFINITION: This fallacy involves misusing scientific terminology to lend credibility to an argument.
- Example 1: Falsely asserting that an idea is scientifically supported without providing any genuine evidence.
- Example 2: Claiming that a particular diet is backed by "scientific research" without citing specific studies or data.
- Example 3: Using scientific jargon to make a pseudoscientific claim seem more credible than it actually is.
17. Strawman
- DEFINITION: The strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to counter.
- Example 1: Misrepresenting an atheistic stance as an outright denial of God's existence, mischaracterizing the actual argument.
- Example 2: Falsely claiming that opponents of a specific policy want complete anarchy, when their actual position is for measured reform.
- Example 3: Distorting a stance on environmental protection as "anti-progress," when in reality it advocates for sustainable development.
18. Tu Quoque Fallacy
- DEFINITION: The tu quoque fallacy involves deflecting an argument by pointing out hypocrisy in the opponent.
- Example 1: Dismissing an anti-smoking argument by highlighting the speaker's own smoking habits.
- Example 2: Criticising a person for not using public transportation while themselves owning a car, as a way to deflect from discussions about improving public transit.
- Example 3: Dismissing calls for ethical sourcing of products by pointing out that the critic also uses products made under questionable conditions.
19. Whataboutery/Whataboutism
- DEFINITION: This is a variant of the tu quoque fallacy where the opponent tries to deflect an argument by pointing out similar behaviour in others.
- Example 1: Evading the issue by asking about others' actions rather than addressing the original point.
- Example 2: When discussing climate change, deflecting by asking why certain countries with high emissions aren't being held accountable.
- Example 3: When confronted about a company's unethical practices, deflecting by asking why other companies aren't being scrutinised.
20. Misinformation 🚫
- DEFINITION: This involves spreading false or inaccurate information to support an argument.
- Example 1: Disseminating incorrect facts to bolster a particular viewpoint.
- Example 2: Sharing a misleading graph to support a political argument, even though the data is taken out of context.
- Example 3: Spreading rumours about a competitor's product to undermine its credibility without any factual basis.
21. Begging The Question
- DEFINITION: This form of reasoning assumes the conclusion within the premise of the argument.
- Example 1: Asserting that the existence of creation necessitates a creator without providing independent evidence.
- Example 2: Arguing that a particular belief is true because it has been believed for centuries, without offering empirical evidence.
- Example 3: Claiming that a deity must exist because the absence of one would leave a "void" in the explanation of the universe.
22. Appeal to Popularity/Bandwagon Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy is based on the belief that something must be true if many people believe it.
- Example 1: Assuming the truth of a belief simply because it is widely held.
- Example 2: Believing a product is effective just because it has many positive online reviews.
- Example 3: Accepting a political candidate's credibility solely because they have a large following on social media.
23. Special Pleading
- DEFINITION: This involves making an exception to a rule on arbitrary or unfair grounds.
- Example 1: Asserting that everything in the universe is caused by something else, except for a specific deity.
- Example 2: Insisting that a particular individual should be exempt from certain rules due to their status, without providing valid justification.
- Example 3: Claiming that a certain theory should be exempt from rigorous scrutiny because it's a cherished belief.
24. Appeal to Ignorance
- DEFINITION: This fallacy occurs when one argues that there must be a reason for something, even if they do not know what it is.
- Example 1: Speculating about the existence of a higher power without providing any concrete evidence.
- Example 2: Assuming that because a phenomenon is not currently explained, it must be supernatural in nature.
- Example 3: Believing in the existence of extraterrestrial life simply because no one has definitively proven its non-existence.
25. Ad Hominem
- DEFINITION: Ad Hominem involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself.
- Example 1: Dismissing an argument based on the perceived qualities or characteristics of the speaker.
- Example 2: Discrediting a scientist's research on climate change by pointing out their personal lifestyle choices.
- Example 3: Ignoring a valid critique of a political policy by attacking the speaker's appearance instead.
26. Burden of Proof Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy places the responsibility of disproving a claim on the sceptic, rather than providing evidence to support the claim.
- Example 1: Insisting that karma exists and challenging others to prove it false.
- Example 2: Asserting the existence of a mythical creature and demanding sceptics to provide evidence of its non-existence.
- Example 3: Claiming that a certain alternative medicine is effective and placing the burden on critics to disprove it.
27. Appeal to Authority
- DEFINITION: This fallacy relies on a reputable individual's endorsement to support an argument.
- Example 1: Arguing that Hinduism is scientifically valid because Carl Sagan made a statement to that effect.
- Example 2: Believing in a particular diet because a celebrity endorses it, even if the celebrity lacks expertise in nutrition.
- Example 3: Accepting a medical treatment solely based on a celebrity doctor's recommendation without considering scientific evidence
28. Cherry Picking
- DEFINITION: Cherry picking involves selectively using facts to support an argument while ignoring contradictory evidence.
- Example 1: Highlighting the intricacies of the eye's design while overlooking instances of eye-related health issues.
- Example 2: Using only positive customer reviews to promote a product while ignoring negative feedback.
- Example 3: Selectively presenting data on a company's financial performance to create a positive impression, while omitting information on debt and losses.
29. Hasty Generalization
- DEFINITION: Hasty generalisation involves making broad conclusions based on limited or unrepresentative evidence.
- Example 1: Generalising from water's properties to unrelated phenomena, like fire or earth having memory.
- Example 2: Assuming that all members of a certain ethnic group have a particular characteristic based on the behaviour of a few individuals.
- Example 3: Concluding that all fast food is unhealthy based on the negative effects of a single type of fast food.
30. Equivocation
- DEFINITION: Equivocation arises when the same word has two different meanings, and the wrong meaning is used to justify a point.
- Example 1: Misinterpreting the term "theory" in the context of evolution, conflating its scientific DEFINITION with its colloquial usage.
- Example 2: Using the term "free market" to argue for minimal government intervention, while ignoring that a truly unregulated market can lead to exploitation and monopolies.
- Example 3: Asserting that "love" in a romantic context is the same as "love" for a favourite food, disregarding the different meanings and implications of the word.
31. Untestable Claim
- DEFINITION: An untestable claim is one that cannot be detected or measured, making it outside the realm of empirical evaluation.
- Example 1: Asserting the existence of an invisible, intangible dragon that breathes heatless fire, which cannot be substantiated through empirical means.
- Example 2: Claiming the existence of a parallel universe that is forever beyond our ability to observe or interact with.
- Example 3: Believing in the existence of supernatural entities that operate outside the laws of physics and cannot be studied using scientific methods.
32. Hindsight Bias
- DEFINITION: Hindsight bias involves looking back at past events and believing that one should have predicted the outcome based on what is now known.
- Example 1: After a cricket match, thinking, "I knew India was going to beat Pakistan today. I should have placed a bet."
- Example 2: Believing that you would have accurately predicted the outcome of a political election after seeing the results.
- Example 3: Feeling that you would have foreseen a stock market crash in hindsight, even though it was unpredictable at the time.
33. Slippery Slope
- DEFINITION: Slippery slope involves assuming that a series of events will lead to an extreme outcome without sufficient evidence.
- Example 1: Projecting that acceptance of certain societal changes will inevitably lead to socially unacceptable behaviour, without demonstrating a causal link.
- Example 2: Arguing that allowing same-sex marriage will eventually lead to the legalization of polygamy, without presenting evidence for this progression.
- Example 3: Claiming that if a specific gun control measure is implemented, it will inevitably lead to the complete confiscation of all firearms.
34. Appeal to Personal Incredulity
- DEFINITION: This fallacy asserts that something must be true because the speaker cannot think of an alternative explanation.
- Example 1: Insisting that if a supreme being did not create the universe, there must be no other plausible explanation.
- Example 2: Believing that because you cannot personally comprehend a complex scientific theory, it must be incorrect.
- Example 3: Dismissing the possibility of extraterrestrial life because it is difficult to imagine life forms different from those on Earth.
35. Negativity Bias
- DEFINITION: Negativity bias refers to the tendency to place greater weight on negative outcomes than on positive ones.
- Example 1: Prioritising concerns about potential harm over potential benefits.
- Example 2: Focusing on a single negative review among many positive ones when evaluating a product.
- Example 3: Placing more emphasis on a company's past failures rather than its successes when assessing its overall performance.
36. Gish Gallop
- DEFINITION: Gish Gallop involves overwhelming opponents with numerous (often faulty) arguments, making it challenging to address each one adequately.
- Example 1: Bombarding an opponent with multiple points to create confusion and prevent them from effectively responding.
- Example 2: Presenting a long list of unrelated grievances in a debate to distract from the main issue.
- Example 3: Offering a rapid-fire series of claims without giving the opponent sufficient time to respond or counter each point.
37. God of the Gaps
- DEFINITION: God of the Gaps is the notion that God is invoked to explain gaps in scientific knowledge, areas where understanding is currently limited.
- Example 1: Using God to explain phenomena, such as consciousness or the origin of the universe, where scientific explanations are still emerging.
- Example 2: Asserting that a deity must be responsible for any aspect of the natural world that science has not yet fully explained.
- Example 3: Claiming that a supernatural force must be the cause of human consciousness because science has not yet provided a complete explanation.
38. False Equivalence
- DEFINITION: False equivalence occurs when two things are incorrectly considered similar when they are fundamentally different.
- Example 1: Asserting that because black clothes absorb heat on a sunny day, they must also absorb "negative energy," despite lacking empirical evidence for such a concept.
- Example 2: Equating the complexities of climate change with natural climate variations to downplay the urgency of addressing human-induced global warming.
- Example 3: Comparing the potential risks of a widely tested and regulated vaccine to the speculative risks of an unproven alternative treatment.
1. Confirmation Bias 🔄
- DEFINITION: Confirmation bias is the inclination to seek, interpret, and remember information in a way that supports preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.
- Example 1: A person who firmly believes in ancient Indian technological advancements might view a discredited text like 'vymaanika shaastra' as proof of flying technology.
- Example 2: Reading only news sources that align with one's political views and dismissing contrary information.
- Example 3: Interpreting ambiguous feedback from a supervisor as positive because it aligns with the belief that one is a highly skilled worker.
2. Anecdotal Evidence
- DEFINITION: Anecdotal evidence involves using personal experiences as a basis for supporting an idea or claim.
- Example 1: Someone claiming that Ayurveda cured their childhood asthma, using their own experience as evidence.
- Example 2: Believing a particular diet is effective because a friend lost weight while following it.
- Example 3: Arguing that a specific meditation technique is the best because it personally led to feelings of calmness and clarity.
3. Research not provided
- DEFINITION: This fallacy occurs when an argument necessitates research but fails to provide any supporting evidence.
- Example 1: Making unverified claims about medical or dietary matters without presenting relevant research.
- Example 2: Asserting that a particular teaching method is superior without citing studies on its effectiveness.
- Example 3: Claiming a new technology is revolutionary without providing data on its capabilities.
4. Appeal to Tradition
- DEFINITION: This fallacy involves using cultural or traditional reasoning to back up an argument or claim.
- Example 1: Justifying the efficacy of certain medicines based on the fact that they have been used by ancestors for generations.
- Example 2: Insisting on following outdated and potentially harmful practices in agriculture due to their longstanding tradition.
- Example 3: Arguing that a particular style of clothing is superior because it has been worn for centuries.
5. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
- DEFINITION: This fallacy assumes that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second.
- Example 1: Believing that a person's recovery was solely due to a specific medicine because they took it before getting better.
- Example 2: Assuming that a lucky charm brought success in an exam simply because it was worn during the study period.
- Example 3: Believing that a rain dance ritual caused rainfall because it happened before a storm.
6. Bad Research
- DEFINITION: This refers to relying on poorly reviewed, non-peer-reviewed, or inadequately published research.
- Example 1: Citing questionable studies in support of diet or medicine claims.
- Example 2: Using a blog post as the primary source of information in a scientific argument.
- Example 3: Relying on a self-published book for information about climate change instead of peer-reviewed studies.
7. Appeal to Emotion
DEFINITION: This fallacy involves manipulating emotions to support an argument rather than presenting factual evidence.
- Example 1: Using emotional pleas rather than logical reasoning to validate a belief.
- Example 2: Evoking fear to promote a particular political agenda without providing substantive data.
- Example 3: Using heart-wrenching anecdotes to argue for a specific social policy without considering its broader implications.
8. Rationalisation
- DEFINITION: Rationalisation occurs when someone makes a decision and then finds a reason to justify that decision, often subconsciously.
- Example 1: Opting for Ayurveda and subsequently extolling its effectiveness.
- Example 2: Deciding to purchase an expensive item and then convincing oneself that it's a necessary investment.
- Example 3: Choosing a particular career path and then retrospectively constructing reasons for the decision.
9. Black and White Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy presents only two extreme options as if there are no other alternatives.
- Example 1: Assuming that a choice is limited to either matter being exclusively a wave or a particle.
- Example 2: Believing that people are either entirely good or entirely evil without considering nuances in behaviour.
- Example 3: Insisting that a complex social issue can only be solved by either complete deregulation or strict government control.
10. Middle Ground Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This occurs when someone asserts that the truth lies in between two extremes without providing evidence for this assertion.
- Example 1: Encouraging a middle-ground approach without substantiating its validity.
- Example 2: Arguing that the ideal tax rate must be somewhere in between 0% and 100% without offering empirical data to support the claim.
- Example 3: Suggesting that a compromise between two conflicting political parties is the best solution without providing specific policy recommendations.
11. Fear Mongering
- DEFINITION: Fear mongering entails creating unnecessary fear about a particular item, often related to food or medicine, without substantial evidence.
- Example 1: Declaring sugar to be a poison without providing convincing proof.
- Example 2: Spreading unfounded rumours about the dangers of a new technology without empirical data to support the claims.
- Example 3: Exaggerating the potential risks of a specific medical treatment without providing robust scientific evidence.
12. False Analogy 🔄
- DEFINITION: This fallacy involves comparing two things and asserting that because one is a certain way, the other must be as well.
- Example 1: Comparing the existence of electrons (supported by evidence) with the existence of God (lacking empirical evidence).
- Example 2: Arguing that just as a car engine requires a creator, so does the universe, without providing empirical evidence for either claim.
- Example 3: Asserting that the growth of a business is similar to the growth of a plant, and therefore they must face similar challenges, without empirical data to support the analogy.
13. Oversimplification
- DEFINITION: Oversimplification occurs when complex concepts are reduced to overly simple explanations, often disregarding important nuances.
- Example 1: Claiming that all sugar should be avoided due to its potential link to heart disease, overlooking intricacies.
- Example 2: Asserting that a complex economic issue can be solved with a single policy change, without considering the broader implications.
- Example 3: Arguing that a social problem can be entirely attributed to a single cause, without acknowledging the multifaceted nature of the issue.
14. Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence
- DEFINITION: This principle states that extraordinary assertions demand substantial evidence for validation.
- Example 1: Demanding strong evidence for extraordinary claims before accepting them as true.
- Example 2: Requiring extensive scientific evidence for a purported breakthrough in perpetual motion machines before accepting its validity.
- Example 3: Insisting on rigorous proof for claims of supernatural phenomena before accepting them as factual.
15. Just Universe Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy assumes that all good and bad deeds in the universe will ultimately balance out over time.
- Example 1: Believing that the positive actions of gurus outweigh any deceptive practices they may engage in.
- Example 2: Assuming that if someone has experienced a series of unfortunate events, they must be due for a stroke of good luck soon.
- Example 3: Believing that a person's success is directly proportional to their moral character, without considering external factors.
16. Using Science to Justify Beliefs
- DEFINITION: This fallacy involves misusing scientific terminology to lend credibility to an argument.
- Example 1: Falsely asserting that an idea is scientifically supported without providing any genuine evidence.
- Example 2: Claiming that a particular diet is backed by "scientific research" without citing specific studies or data.
- Example 3: Using scientific jargon to make a pseudoscientific claim seem more credible than it actually is.
17. Strawman
- DEFINITION: The strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to counter.
- Example 1: Misrepresenting an atheistic stance as an outright denial of God's existence, mischaracterizing the actual argument.
- Example 2: Falsely claiming that opponents of a specific policy want complete anarchy, when their actual position is for measured reform.
- Example 3: Distorting a stance on environmental protection as "anti-progress," when in reality it advocates for sustainable development.
18. Tu Quoque Fallacy
- DEFINITION: The tu quoque fallacy involves deflecting an argument by pointing out hypocrisy in the opponent.
- Example 1: Dismissing an anti-smoking argument by highlighting the speaker's own smoking habits.
- Example 2: Criticising a person for not using public transportation while themselves owning a car, as a way to deflect from discussions about improving public transit.
- Example 3: Dismissing calls for ethical sourcing of products by pointing out that the critic also uses products made under questionable conditions.
19. Whataboutery/Whataboutism
- DEFINITION: This is a variant of the tu quoque fallacy where the opponent tries to deflect an argument by pointing out similar behaviour in others.
- Example 1: Evading the issue by asking about others' actions rather than addressing the original point.
- Example 2: When discussing climate change, deflecting by asking why certain countries with high emissions aren't being held accountable.
- Example 3: When confronted about a company's unethical practices, deflecting by asking why other companies aren't being scrutinised.
20. Misinformation 🚫
- DEFINITION: This involves spreading false or inaccurate information to support an argument.
- Example 1: Disseminating incorrect facts to bolster a particular viewpoint.
- Example 2: Sharing a misleading graph to support a political argument, even though the data is taken out of context.
- Example 3: Spreading rumours about a competitor's product to undermine its credibility without any factual basis.
21. Begging The Question
- DEFINITION: This form of reasoning assumes the conclusion within the premise of the argument.
- Example 1: Asserting that the existence of creation necessitates a creator without providing independent evidence.
- Example 2: Arguing that a particular belief is true because it has been believed for centuries, without offering empirical evidence.
- Example 3: Claiming that a deity must exist because the absence of one would leave a "void" in the explanation of the universe.
22. Appeal to Popularity/Bandwagon Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy is based on the belief that something must be true if many people believe it.
- Example 1: Assuming the truth of a belief simply because it is widely held.
- Example 2: Believing a product is effective just because it has many positive online reviews.
- Example 3: Accepting a political candidate's credibility solely because they have a large following on social media.
23. Special Pleading
- DEFINITION: This involves making an exception to a rule on arbitrary or unfair grounds.
- Example 1: Asserting that everything in the universe is caused by something else, except for a specific deity.
- Example 2: Insisting that a particular individual should be exempt from certain rules due to their status, without providing valid justification.
- Example 3: Claiming that a certain theory should be exempt from rigorous scrutiny because it's a cherished belief.
24. Appeal to Ignorance
- DEFINITION: This fallacy occurs when one argues that there must be a reason for something, even if they do not know what it is.
- Example 1: Speculating about the existence of a higher power without providing any concrete evidence.
- Example 2: Assuming that because a phenomenon is not currently explained, it must be supernatural in nature.
- Example 3: Believing in the existence of extraterrestrial life simply because no one has definitively proven its non-existence.
25. Ad Hominem
- DEFINITION: Ad Hominem involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself.
- Example 1: Dismissing an argument based on the perceived qualities or characteristics of the speaker.
- Example 2: Discrediting a scientist's research on climate change by pointing out their personal lifestyle choices.
- Example 3: Ignoring a valid critique of a political policy by attacking the speaker's appearance instead.
26. Burden of Proof Fallacy
- DEFINITION: This fallacy places the responsibility of disproving a claim on the sceptic, rather than providing evidence to support the claim.
- Example 1: Insisting that karma exists and challenging others to prove it false.
- Example 2: Asserting the existence of a mythical creature and demanding sceptics to provide evidence of its non-existence.
- Example 3: Claiming that a certain alternative medicine is effective and placing the burden on critics to disprove it.
27. Appeal to Authority
- DEFINITION: This fallacy relies on a reputable individual's endorsement to support an argument.
- Example 1: Arguing that Hinduism is scientifically valid because Carl Sagan made a statement to that effect.
- Example 2: Believing in a particular diet because a celebrity endorses it, even if the celebrity lacks expertise in nutrition.
- Example 3: Accepting a medical treatment solely based on a celebrity doctor's recommendation without considering scientific evidence
28. Cherry Picking
- DEFINITION: Cherry picking involves selectively using facts to support an argument while ignoring contradictory evidence.
- Example 1: Highlighting the intricacies of the eye's design while overlooking instances of eye-related health issues.
- Example 2: Using only positive customer reviews to promote a product while ignoring negative feedback.
- Example 3: Selectively presenting data on a company's financial performance to create a positive impression, while omitting information on debt and losses.
29. Hasty Generalization
- DEFINITION: Hasty generalisation involves making broad conclusions based on limited or unrepresentative evidence.
- Example 1: Generalising from water's properties to unrelated phenomena, like fire or earth having memory.
- Example 2: Assuming that all members of a certain ethnic group have a particular characteristic based on the behaviour of a few individuals.
- Example 3: Concluding that all fast food is unhealthy based on the negative effects of a single type of fast food.
30. Equivocation
- DEFINITION: Equivocation arises when the same word has two different meanings, and the wrong meaning is used to justify a point.
- Example 1: Misinterpreting the term "theory" in the context of evolution, conflating its scientific DEFINITION with its colloquial usage.
- Example 2: Using the term "free market" to argue for minimal government intervention, while ignoring that a truly unregulated market can lead to exploitation and monopolies.
- Example 3: Asserting that "love" in a romantic context is the same as "love" for a favourite food, disregarding the different meanings and implications of the word.
31. Untestable Claim
- DEFINITION: An untestable claim is one that cannot be detected or measured, making it outside the realm of empirical evaluation.
- Example 1: Asserting the existence of an invisible, intangible dragon that breathes heatless fire, which cannot be substantiated through empirical means.
- Example 2: Claiming the existence of a parallel universe that is forever beyond our ability to observe or interact with.
- Example 3: Believing in the existence of supernatural entities that operate outside the laws of physics and cannot be studied using scientific methods.
32. Hindsight Bias
- DEFINITION: Hindsight bias involves looking back at past events and believing that one should have predicted the outcome based on what is now known.
- Example 1: After a cricket match, thinking, "I knew India was going to beat Pakistan today. I should have placed a bet."
- Example 2: Believing that you would have accurately predicted the outcome of a political election after seeing the results.
- Example 3: Feeling that you would have foreseen a stock market crash in hindsight, even though it was unpredictable at the time.
33. Slippery Slope
- DEFINITION: Slippery slope involves assuming that a series of events will lead to an extreme outcome without sufficient evidence.
- Example 1: Projecting that acceptance of certain societal changes will inevitably lead to socially unacceptable behaviour, without demonstrating a causal link.
- Example 2: Arguing that allowing same-sex marriage will eventually lead to the legalization of polygamy, without presenting evidence for this progression.
- Example 3: Claiming that if a specific gun control measure is implemented, it will inevitably lead to the complete confiscation of all firearms.
34. Appeal to Personal Incredulity
- DEFINITION: This fallacy asserts that something must be true because the speaker cannot think of an alternative explanation.
- Example 1: Insisting that if a supreme being did not create the universe, there must be no other plausible explanation.
- Example 2: Believing that because you cannot personally comprehend a complex scientific theory, it must be incorrect.
- Example 3: Dismissing the possibility of extraterrestrial life because it is difficult to imagine life forms different from those on Earth.
35. Negativity Bias
- DEFINITION: Negativity bias refers to the tendency to place greater weight on negative outcomes than on positive ones.
- Example 1: Prioritising concerns about potential harm over potential benefits.
- Example 2: Focusing on a single negative review among many positive ones when evaluating a product.
- Example 3: Placing more emphasis on a company's past failures rather than its successes when assessing its overall performance.
36. Gish Gallop
- DEFINITION: Gish Gallop involves overwhelming opponents with numerous (often faulty) arguments, making it challenging to address each one adequately.
- Example 1: Bombarding an opponent with multiple points to create confusion and prevent them from effectively responding.
- Example 2: Presenting a long list of unrelated grievances in a debate to distract from the main issue.
- Example 3: Offering a rapid-fire series of claims without giving the opponent sufficient time to respond or counter each point.
37. God of the Gaps
- DEFINITION: God of the Gaps is the notion that God is invoked to explain gaps in scientific knowledge, areas where understanding is currently limited.
- Example 1: Using God to explain phenomena, such as consciousness or the origin of the universe, where scientific explanations are still emerging.
- Example 2: Asserting that a deity must be responsible for any aspect of the natural world that science has not yet fully explained.
- Example 3: Claiming that a supernatural force must be the cause of human consciousness because science has not yet provided a complete explanation.
38. False Equivalence
- DEFINITION: False equivalence occurs when two things are incorrectly considered similar when they are fundamentally different.
- Example 1: Asserting that because black clothes absorb heat on a sunny day, they must also absorb "negative energy," despite lacking empirical evidence for such a concept.
- Example 2: Equating the complexities of climate change with natural climate variations to downplay the urgency of addressing human-induced global warming.
- Example 3: Comparing the potential risks of a widely tested and regulated vaccine to the speculative risks of an unproven alternative treatment.
Tags
Article