Appeal to Consequences: An argument that concludes a premise (typically a belief) to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences.
Appeal to Motive: Logical fallacy of calling into question the motives of one's opponent, often without showing that the supposed motive had any role in forming their conclusion.
Appeal to Probability: Logical fallacy that assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen.
Appeal to Ridicule: A logical fallacy which presents the opponent's argument in a way that appears ridiculous, often to the extent of creating a straw man of the actual argument.
Argument from Personal Incredulity: Asserting that a proposition must be wrong because one is unable or unwilling to fully consider that it might be true, or is unwilling to believe the supporting evidence.
Argumentum ad Antiquitatem: A logical fallacy in which a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it correlates with some past or present tradition.
Argumentum ad Crumenam: The logical fallacy of concluding that a statement is correct because the speaker is rich.
Argumentum ad Hominem: Replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim rather than by addressing the substance of the argument.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: In which it is claimed that a premise is true only because it has not been proved false or that a premise is false only because it has not been proved true.
Argumentum ad Imaginibus: Dismissing the identification of logical fallacies in one's argument solely because your opponent used a prepared graphic to clearly explain the logical error.
Fallacy Fallacy: A logical fallacy which assumes if an argument if fallacious, its conclusion must be false.
Bare Assertion: A fallacy in formal logic where a premise in an argument is assumed to be true merely because it says that it is true.
Double Standard of Proof: Equivocation as to whether metaphysically absolute or empirically probabilistic standard of proof is appropriate.
Equivocation: The Fallacy of Equivocation occurs when an equivocal word or phrase makes an unsound argument appear sound.
False Dichotomy: A fallacy in which two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there exist one or more other options which have not been considered.
Non Sequitur: A logical fallacy committed when a conclusion does not follow from the premises of the argument.
"No True Scotsman" Fallacy: A logical fallacy where the definition of the subject is silently adjusted after the fact to make the rebuttal work.
Begging the Question: The fallacy in which the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: A logical fallacy which assumes or asserts that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second.
Quoting Out of Context: Logical fallacy in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning.
Straw Man Argument: To create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.