Mar 17, 2010 - 0 Comments - Humor, Media, Philosophy, Politics -

New Game: Logical Fallacy Bingo!

In the America of Barack Obama and his lapdogs in the media, we are bombarded constantly with logical fallacies. Rather than being desensitized to them turn the target-rich environment into a competitive pastime. It’s the next “logical” step to buzzword bingo: Logical Fallacy Bingo! Enjoy.

  • Ad hominem – Arguing “against the man,” attacking an opponent personally rather than refuting their claims with logic and reason
  • Ad nauseam – Literally “to the point of nausea.” Repeating the same flawed argument to a sickening extent as if repetition makes it more valid.
  • Anecdotal fallacy – Citing anecdotes in which an assertion appears to be true as proof that theĀ  assertion is universally true
  • Appeal to authority – Asserting that an assertion is true only because some presumed authority says so
  • Appeal to the gallery – The “everyone knows that X is true” fallacy
  • Appeal to intellectual capability – Asserting that an opponent’s argument is wrong by denigrating his intelligence, knowledge, or capabilities of understanding
  • Appeal to motive – Ascribing ulterior motives to an opponent rather than addressing the substance of his argument.
  • Begging the question – Circular reasoning, arguing for a conclusion using statements which presume that the conclusion is true
  • Biased sample – Arguing that a claim is true based on prejudicial evidence
  • Chronological snobbery – Presuming that ideas and arguments from earlier times are inherently inferior to present day arguments
  • Circumstantial ad hominem -Attempting to refute a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is only making it for personal gain
  • Etymological fallacy – Falsely assuming that the present day usage and meaning of a word is the original or historical usage and meaning
  • Guilt by association – Someone you don’t like makes a claim, therefore the claim is false
  • Hasty generalization – Drawing a conclusion about a population based on too small a sample of that population
  • Ipse disxit – Literally “he himself said it,” using a dogmatic assertion without supporting it logically
  • Loaded question – Asking a question which presupposes some unproven assertion
  • Poisoning the well – Condemning a person in order to subsequently argue that whatever he asserts is false
  • Post hoc ergo propter hoc – Literally “after this therefore because of this,” arguing that A occurred before B therefore A is the cause of B
  • Red herring – Introducing an irrelevant topic in order to divert attention from the actual subject of an argument
  • Reductio ad absurdum – Taking an opponent’s argument and reducing it to an absurd extreme
  • Straw man – Ignoring an opponent’s actual position and substituting a distortion which is then refuted
  • Tu quoque – Arguing that an assertion is false because the person making it does not live as if his assertion is true.

%d bloggers like this: