Discover published sets by community

Attacking the character or circumstances of an individual instead of engaging with their argument. Example: Dismissing a researcher's findings on cognitive behavior because they are a high school dropout.

Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack. Example: 'The psychologist says we should talk more about our feelings, but I think we should not obsess over every emotion we experience.'

Using the opinion of an authority figure, or institution of authority, as evidence in your argument when the authority is not really an expert in that field. Example: 'A famous actress said that this new therapy method is the best, so it must be effective.'

Assuming that because one thing occurred after another, it must have occurred as a result of it. Example: 'I started using a new study method and then my grades improved, so the study method must be the reason.'

Presenting two opposing options as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist. Example: 'We can either agree with the therapist's advice or stay unhappy forever.'

Arguing that a small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact. Example: 'If we allow students to use calculators, soon they won't be able to perform even the simplest of calculations.'

When the argument just restates the premise rather than giving a real reason. Example: 'People with a higher IQ are more intelligent because intelligent people have higher IQs.'

Jumping to conclusions by generalizing from insufficient evidence. Example: 'I met two psychologists who were not good listeners; psychologists must be bad at listening.'

Introducing irrelevant material to the argument to distract and lead away from the point at issue. Example: 'Though unrelated to performance, the study about stress neglected to report the socioeconomic status of participants.'

Assuming that a claim is true because it has not been or cannot be proven false, or vice versa. Example: 'No one has ever proven that extraterrestrial life doesn't exist, so aliens must be real.'

Arguing that a claim must be true merely because a substantial number of people believe it. Example: 'Many people believe that left-handed individuals are more creative, therefore it must be true.'

Assuming that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or 'always has been done.' Example: 'We have always categorized people into learning styles; therefore, it's a valid approach to education.'

Assuming that something is better or correct simply because it is new or modern. Example: 'This new brain-training app must be more effective because it uses the latest neuroscience research.'

Assuming, without proof, that the claim being made is true. Example: 'The self-report measure is reliable because it accurately measures what it claims to measure.'

Making a comparison between two things that are not alike in significant respects or have critical differences. Example: 'Brains are like computers, so treating mental illness is just like fixing a hardware problem.'

Attempting to defend a generalization by discounting contrary evidence as irrelevant purely because it doesn't fit an arbitrary criterion. Example: 'No true psychologist would ever ignore evidence, so those studies must be invalid.'

Cherry-picking data clusters to suit an argument or finding a pattern to fit a presumption. Example: 'These five studies support psychoanalysis, so psychoanalysis is a proven method.'

Asserting that the burden of proof lies not with the person making the claim, but with someone else to disprove. Example: 'You can't prove that extrasensory perception doesn't exist, so it must be considered a valid phenomenon.'

Drawing an equivalence between two things that are not equivalent. Example: 'A mistake made by a researcher is just as bad as a mistake made by a politician.'