World PhiloMathematics & Design Society

The genetic fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when the origin or history of a belief or idea is used to determine its validity or truth. This fallacy asserts that the origins of a belief or idea somehow invalidate its legitimacy, which is not logically sound. Instead of evaluating the merit of the belief or idea itself, the genetic fallacy relies on irrelevant factors to dismiss it.   Examples: Dismissing a scientific theory because the scientist who proposed it has a controversial personal background is a classic example of this fallacy.  Discrediting a research study or its results because it comes from a lesser-known college, which overlooks the validity of the argument by focusing on the source's prestige rather than its intellectual merit.  In physiology , one might commit a genetic fallacy by dismissing a new exercise regimen simply because it was developed by a relatively unknown trainer, ignoring the regimen's potential benefits. In medicine, it could manifest as

The irrelevant conclusion fallacy, also known as ignoratio elenchi, Red Herring, or Missing the Point is a logical misstep where the argument presented fails to address the main issue or question at hand. Instead, it diverts attention to an unrelated topic. This can be particularly misleading in fields that rely heavily on evidence-based conclusions. Examples: In physiology , one might argue that because a particular diet leads to weight loss, it will also increase longevity; however, this conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premise.  In medicine , a drug might be promoted for its efficacy in treating a particular symptom, but this does not address its overall safety profile or potential side effects.  In the realm of pharmacy , a medication's popularity or widespread use is sometimes cited as evidence of its effectiveness, which is a clear example of the irrelevant conclusion fallacy since popularity does not equate to efficacy. In dentistry , the aesthetic outcome of

The Fallacy of the Maturity of Chances, also known as the Gambler's Fallacy, is a cognitive bias that occurs when individuals believe that future outcomes will be influenced by past events, despite the events being independent of each other.  It is a common misconception that arises from the incorrect belief that if something happens more frequently than normal during a given period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or vice versa. This fallacy is based on the mistaken belief that there is a pattern or trend that will eventually reverse itself, leading individuals to make poor decisions based on this faulty reasoning.  Examples: In the medical field, if a particular treatment yields positive results in several consecutive patients, one might fallaciously infer that it will be less effective in the next patient, ignoring the randomness of treatment outcomes. In physiology , this fallacy might manifest in the belief that after a string of successful surgeries, a failure i

The Suppressed Evidence fallacy, also known as the fallacy of suppressed evidence, cherry-picking, or Furtive fallacy, involves emphasizing certain aspects or evidence while hiding others to support a particular conclusion as well as significant outcomes are attributed to clandestine or deceptive actions, often involving a conspiracy or hidden misconduct by decision-makers. Also, if a researcher were to selectively report only the data that supports their hypothesis while disregarding data that contradicts it, they would be committing the Suppressed Evidence Fallacy. This fallacy can be particularly detrimental in fields that rely heavily on empirical evidence and objective analysis. Examples:  In economics , when evaluating the impact of a new tax policy, one might only highlight the positive effects on government revenue while ignoring the negative outcomes such as reduced consumer spending or business investment. The selective presentation of economic data to argue for a specific tr

The false dilemma fallacy, also known as the either/or fallacy , or the false dichotomy fallacy , is a common logical fallacy in which the arguer presents only two options as being available, when in reality there are more choices to consider .  This type of reasoning fails to consider a range of alternatives and forces a black-and-white view on complex issues. This fallacy is often used in complex issues and manipulate audiences into accepting a limited set of options.  Examples: In science , one might encounter the false dilemma in debates about nature versus nurture, where it is argued that a particular behavior is caused either by genetics or by the environment, neglecting the possibility of an interaction between the two. In physiology , this fallacy might manifest in the oversimplified view that one must either adhere strictly to natural remedies or rely solely on pharmaceutical interventions, ignoring the nuanced reality that a combination of both approaches can be beneficial. 

False attribution fallacy involves citing irrelevant, biased, or unqualified information to support an argument. The false attribution fallacy is a common logical fallacy in which one incorrectly attributes a particular cause or source to a certain effect or outcome. This type of fallacy is often used to manipulate or deceive others in order to support a particular agenda or belief. Examples: In the realm of physiology , an elevated heart rate could be attributed to a person's anxious nature, rather than the immediate physical activity they are engaged in. In medicine , the fallacy can result in misdiagnosis, where symptoms are attributed to common illnesses without considering rare diseases or external causes like exposure to toxins. Pharmacy professionals might fall into this trap by attributing a patient's non-response to medication to their non-compliance, rather than potential drug interactions or genetic factors affecting drug metabolism. Astronomers could mistakenly attr