A reference for better arguments.
Logical fallacies, cognitive biases, and rhetorical devices: what they are, why they go wrong, and how to fix them. Each entry has a short URL so the page can do the explaining for you.
fallacy.is/straw-man
fallacy.is/whataboutism
fallacy.is/ad-hominem
Logical fallacies
Ad Hominem
Attacking the person making an argument instead of the argument itself.
Anecdotal Evidence
Drawing a general conclusion from a single story or personal experience.
Appeal to Authority
Using a person's status as proof of a claim, instead of the evidence behind the claim.
Appeal to Emotion
Substituting an emotional reaction for an argument about the facts.
Appeal to Ignorance
Treating the absence of evidence against a claim as evidence for it, or vice versa.
Bandwagon
Treating how many people believe a claim as evidence that the claim is true.
Broken Window Fallacy
Counting the visible benefits of an event while ignoring what the same resources would otherwise have done.
Cherry Picking
Presenting only the evidence that supports your case and ignoring the rest.
Circular Reasoning
Supporting a claim with the claim itself, dressed up in different words.
Equivocation
Using a word in two different senses within the same argument, as if they were the same.
False Cause
Concluding that one thing caused another based on correlation or sequence alone.
False Dichotomy
Framing a choice as two options when more exist.
False Equivalence
Treating two things as equivalent when they differ in ways that matter to the argument.
Genetic Fallacy
Judging a claim by its source, origin, or history instead of its content.
Hasty Generalization
Drawing a broad conclusion from a sample too small or unrepresentative to support it.
Loaded Question
Asking a question that smuggles in an unproven assumption the answerer can't address without conceding it.
Middle Ground
Assuming the truth must lie halfway between two positions, simply because those are the two positions on offer.
No True Scotsman
Redefining a category on the fly to exclude counterexamples, protecting a claim about the category.
Post Hoc
Assuming that because one thing followed another, the first caused the second.
Red Herring
Introducing an irrelevant topic to distract from the actual argument.
Slippery Slope
Claiming a small step will inevitably cause a chain of extreme consequences, without showing why.
Straw Man
Replacing someone's argument with a weaker version, then knocking down the weaker version.
Tu Quoque
Dismissing a critique by pointing out that the critic is guilty of the same thing.
Cognitive biases
Anchoring
Letting an initial number or reference point pull later judgments toward it, even when that starting point is arbitrary.
Availability Heuristic
Judging how likely something is by how easily examples come to mind.
Confirmation Bias
The tendency to notice, remember, and trust evidence that supports what you already believe.
Dunning-Kruger Effect
A pattern where people with limited competence in a domain tend to overestimate their ability in that domain.
Gambler's Fallacy
Believing that past random outcomes change the odds of future independent ones.
Sunk Cost Fallacy
Continuing a course of action because of what has already been spent on it, rather than what it still offers.
Survivorship Bias
Drawing conclusions from the things that made it through while ignoring the ones that didn't.
Debate tactics
DARVO
Answering an accusation by denying it, attacking the accuser, and recasting yourself as the real victim.
Gish Gallop
Burying an opponent in a flood of claims, too many and too fast to refute in real time.
Kafkatrap
An argument built so that denying the accusation counts as proof of the accusation.
Motte and Bailey
Defending a bold claim by retreating to a weaker, related claim when challenged, then returning to the bold claim later.
Moving the Goalposts
Dismissing evidence that meets your demand, then demanding new, harder evidence.
Sealioning
Hounding someone with relentless, polite requests for evidence to exhaust them rather than to understand.
Shifting the Burden of Proof
Demanding your opponent disprove your claim instead of supporting it yourself.
Statistical fallacies
Base Rate Fallacy
Reading a test result or a piece of evidence without accounting for how common the thing being tested for actually is.
Berkson's Paradox
A filter that selects on two traits at once makes those traits look negatively related inside the selected group.
Correlation Is Not Causation
Treating a statistical association as evidence of cause without ruling out confounders, reverse causation, selection, or chance.
Ecological Fallacy
Concluding something about an individual from a statistic that describes the group they belong to.
Misleading Average
Reporting a mean that hides a skewed distribution, so the average ends up describing almost nobody in the data.
P-Hacking
Running analyses until one crosses the significance threshold, then reporting that one as though it were the only test.
Regression to the Mean
Extreme results tend to be followed by ordinary ones for purely statistical reasons, and that drift gets mistaken for an effect.
Simpson's Paradox
A pattern that holds in every subgroup can reverse once the subgroups are pooled, so the combined number tells the opposite story.
Small Sample Size
Small groups produce more extreme results by chance alone, so they crowd both the top and the bottom of any ranking.
Texas Sharpshooter
Finding a pattern in the data first, then presenting it as the thing you set out to test.