Common Logical Fallacies
As the term suggests, logical fallacies are flaws in reasoning that detract from the
overall value of an argument. Politicians are often guilty of using logical fallacies
in an attempt to gain public support. Writers, however, cannot resort to such tactics,
especially because writing is usually closely evaluated. Good writers avoid using
logical fallacies because they detract from the value of an argument rather than add
The following is a list of common logical fallacies writers should avoid.
- Hasty Generalization (also called overgeneralization). The writer bases the argument on insufficient evidence. The writer draws a larger
conclusion than the evidence supports.
- Non Sequitor (“it doesn’t follow”). The writer’s conclusion is not necessarily a logical result of the facts.
- Begging the Question. The writer presents as truth what is not yet proven by the argument. (Before an argument
on a topic can be made or a solution offered, the reader must be convinced that there
is a problem.)
- Red Herring. The writer introduces an irrelevant point to divert the reader’s attention from the
- Argument Ad Hominem (“to the man”). The writer attacks the opponent’s character rather than the opponent’s argument.
- Faulty Use of Authority (ad verecundiam). The writer relies on "authorities" who are not convincing sources.
- Argument Ad Populum (“to the people”): The writer evades the issues by appealing to the reader’s emotional reactions to
- Either/or: The writer tries to convince readers the issue has only two sides. Most reasonable
people understand a middle ground often exists, especially when dealing with complex
- Hypostatization: The writer uses an abstract concept as if it were a concrete reality (i.e. science has proven, research shows, history has taught, etc.).
- Bandwagon Appeal: The writer tries to validate a point by suggesting that "everyone else believes in
- Straw Man: The writer selects the opposition’s weakest or most insignificant point to argue
- Faulty Analogy: The writer uses an extended comparison as proof of a point.
- Card Stacking: t he writer selects only data that supports the writer's own viewpoint and ignores
- Oversimplification: The writer tends to overlook complexity in an argument (relying on a simple explanation
because it comes easily.).
- Slippery Slope: The assumption that one thing leads to another (the next step).