1. Logical Fallacies

2. Sentimental Appeal
Using emotion to distract the audience from the facts
To which emotions is this appealing?

3. Ad Hominem
Arguments that attack a person’s character instead of their reasoning
What two ways are these men’s character being attacked?

4. False Authority
Wants the audience to agree with the argument based simply on the person, who is not an expert in the field
Freedom of speech=yes, credible authority=no.
“When you talk about postpartum (depression) women today can use vitamins to help”.

5. Red Herring
Using misleading or unrelated evidence to distract from the actual argument

6. Scare Tactic
Trying to frighten people to agree with the argument or face unrealistically dire consequences

7. Bandwagon
Encourages the audience to agree with the argument because everyone else is doing it

8. Slippery Slope
Suggests that one thing will lead to another and another usually ending with disastrous results

9. Moral Equivalence
Compares minor problems with much more serious crimes (or vice versa)
Obamacare is just like what Hitler did to the youth of Germany prior to World War II.

10. Strawman (Person)
An argument is set up and dismantled easily in order to misrepresent its strength

11. Hasty Generalization
Draws conclusions from little or no evidence; extrapolates minute evidence into a larger claim

12. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (Faulty Causality)
Mob after a woman accused of witchcraft in Nepal
In Latin it means: “After this, therefore because of this”
One event is said to be the cause of a later event, simply because it occurred earlier.

13. Non Sequitur Latin for “does not follow”
A statement does not logically follow that which comes before

14. Begging the Question
Restating the same claim in a different way; circular logic
A: Stem cell research is acceptable
B: How do you know
A: Because stem cell research science says so
B: Why should I believe the stem cell research science
A: Because stem cell research is acceptable