World PhiloMathematics & Design Society

The scarecrow fallacy, also known as the straw man fallacy, is a logical error where an argument is misrepresented to make it easier to attack or refute. Instead of dealing with the actual issue, this fallacy sidesteps it by distorting the opposing view, setting up a 'strawman' to knock down. This fallacy is aptly named after the image of a scarecrow, which is meant to scare away birds but has no real substance or strength. Beyond the scarecrow fallacy, there are several other names that this fallacy may be referred to, depending on the specific context or interpretation. One such name for the scarecrow fallacy is the hollow man fallacy, which emphasizes the lack of substance or validity in the misrepresented argument. This name highlights the emptiness of the straw man argument and the ease with which it can be dismantled when compared to the original argument. In this fallacy, the opponent creates a hollow version of the original argument, making it easier to knock down and...

The special pleading fallacy, also known as "double standards" or "selective adherence," is a logical inconsistency where an individual applies different rules or standards to themselves than to others without proper justification. This fallacy occurs when someone tries to exempt their own position from critical examination by making excuses or justifications that are not based on sound reasoning. Special pleading can be a subtle form of dishonesty because it undermines the principles of fairness and consistency in argumentation. Examples:  A defendant may argue that their difficult upbringing should excuse their criminal behavior, even if there is no direct causal link between the two. This type of special pleading can undermine the justice system by allowing individuals to evade accountability for their actions. A company argues for special tax breaks not because of any broader economic principle, but simply because it would benefit them financially. A policymake...

The reification fallacy, also known as concretism, hypostatization or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness, is a cognitive error where abstract concepts are treated as if they have a physical or concrete existence. This fallacy often leads to confusion and misunderstanding as it confuses the qualities of an abstract concept with those of a tangible thing. Examples : In physiology , this fallacy might manifest when a theoretical model of a physiological process is mistaken for the actual process itself. For instance, the 'fight or flight' response is a simplified abstraction of complex physiological reactions to stress, and treating it as a concrete, unvarying response would be a reification fallacy.  In medicine , reification can occur when a diagnosis, which is essentially a label for a set of symptoms, is treated as the definitive presence of a disease, ignoring the nuances of individual patient experiences.   When people talk about " society " as if it were a livi...

The verbosity fallacy, also known as as argumentum verbosium, proof by verbosity, or proof by intimidation, occurs when someone tries to win an argument by overwhelming their opponent with an excessive amount of words or information, rather than focusing on the quality of their argument. This fallacy relies on the belief that more words equate to a more convincing argument, when in reality, it is the substance and logic of the argument that should be the focus. Examples: In science , this can manifest when a researcher presents a barrage of data, jargon, and mathematical equations, assuming that the sheer volume of information will persuade peers and the public. For example, a scientist might list numerous irrelevant statistics and complex theories to support a hypothesis, overshadowing the lack of robust evidence or logical coherence. This tactic can be particularly misleading in scientific debates, where a clear and concise presentation of facts should prevail.  The verbosity fal...

The "proving too much" fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument is pushed to an extreme, leading to absurd or unrealistic conclusions. This fallacy is also known as the "slippery slope" fallacy or overgeneralization, as it involves making overly broad generalizations that do not logically follow from the premises presented. Examples If a study on a new drug claims it cures all diseases because it has been shown to treat one specific ailment effectively, this would be a case of Proving Too Much. The argument is flawed because it assumes without sufficient evidence that the drug's effectiveness on one condition applies universally. A The assertion that because a particular scientific model explains a phenomenon in one context, it must therefore explain all similar phenomena, disregarding the nuances and variables that differ in each case. Such overextensions can lead to the dismissal of the argument as it claims more than what is logically justifi...

The Personal Incredulity fallacy is a logical error that occurs when an individual dismisses a claim or concept because it seems too difficult to understand or goes against their personal experience or beliefs, rather than due to any concrete evidence against it. This fallacy occurs when someone concludes that a statement is false or incorrect solely because they do not believe it to be true based on their own personal beliefs or lack of understanding. Examples : Example of the personal incredulity fallacy is the idea that climate change is not real because the weather seems to be unpredictable. Some individuals refuse to accept the overwhelming evidence of human-caused climate change because they do not understand the complexities of the climate system or cannot imagine that human activities could have such a significant impact on the environment. In the field of physiology , for example, one might reject the complex mechanisms of homeostasis because they cannot fathom the intricate...

The fallacy of the mean, also known as the fallacy of the middle ground or the fallacy of moderation, is a logical error in which it is assumed that the truth lies in between two opposing viewpoints simply because they are perceived as extremes. This fallacy suggests that a moderate position between two extremes must be correct, without considering the actual merits of the arguments. Examples : In the realm of education , the fallacy of the mean can be observed in debates over standardized testing. Some argue for standardized testing as the only way to measure student achievement, while others argue for completely abolishing standardized testing. The fallacy of the mean would suggest that a compromise, such as using standardized testing only for certain subjects or grade levels, would be the best solution. However, research has shown that standardized testing can have negative effects on student learning and should be used in conjunction with other assessment methods. In economics , if...

The Appeal to Purity fallacy, is a logical fallacy where one modifies the definition of a term in an ad hoc (when needed) fashion to exclude a counterexample and protect a general assertion. It is a common logical fallacy where someone dismisses a valid criticism or counterargument by claiming that it does not apply to their position because it is based on a distorted or impure version of that position. In other words, the person making the argument is trying to maintain the purity or perfection of their position by redefining it to exclude any criticisms. Examples: In the realm of health and wellness, the appeal to purity fallacy can be seen when someone claims that only a certain type of diet or exercise routine is truly effective or beneficial. This argument ignores the individual differences in metabolism, genetics, and lifestyle that may impact the effectiveness of different health practices. One example of the appeal to purity fallacy is when a political candidate claims that th...

The loaded question fallacy, also known as a complex question or presupposition, is a rhetorical device in which a question contains a controversial assumption that is hidden or not explicitly stated. By asking a question that already assumes something to be true, the person posing the question is attempting to manipulate the respondent into agreeing with their viewpoint. This fallacy is often used in debates, interviews, and arguments to steer the conversation in a certain direction and undermine the opposing side. Examples: One common example of a complex question fallacy is "Have you stopped cheating on your taxes?" This question presupposes that the person being asked has been cheating on their taxes, putting them in a difficult position where they must deny the accusation or risk incriminating themselves. By framing the question in this way, the asker is attempting to discredit the respondent and cast doubt on their integrity.  "Do you still beat your wife?" Th...

The inflation of conflict fallacy occurs when someone exaggerates or amplifies the severity of a conflict or disagreement to make it seem more significant or dramatic than it actually is. This fallacy can be used as a rhetorical strategy to manipulate emotions, discredit opponents, or justify extreme actions. Examples: In the media , the inflation of conflict fallacy can be seen in sensationalist headlines and news stories that focus on the most extreme or controversial aspects of a situation while ignoring context or nuance. For example, a peaceful protest may be portrayed as a violent uprising if the media chooses to only report on isolated incidents of vandalism or aggression. One common example of the inflation of conflict fallacy in politics is when politicians or media outlets sensationalize minor disagreements or differences of opinion to create division and stir up controversy. For instance, during election campaigns, candidates often magnify small policy discrepancies between ...

The faulty comparison fallacy, also known as the Incomplete Comparison, false equivalence or apples-to-oranges comparison, is a common logical error that occurs when individuals compare two things that are not truly comparable. This fallacy can lead to misleading conclusions or false equivalences, as it overlooks significant differences and nuances. This fallacy is prevalent in various areas, where people often use comparisons to make arguments or justify their positions.  It's crucial in serious discourse to make complete and contextual comparisons to ensure accurate and reliable information.  Examples : In science , one might claim that a certain medication is superior without providing a comparison to other medications or considering all side effects.  Comparing the speed of two different chemical reactions without accounting for temperature and pressure conditions.  In physiology , a faulty comparison might arise when comparing the efficacy of two drugs without c...

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 ...

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 outcom...

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 fail...