An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments: Learn the Lost Art of Making Sense (Bad Arguments)

by Ali Almossawi

Logic does not generate new truths, but rather allows one to evaluate existing chains of thought for consistency and coherence. It is precisely for that reason that it proves an effective tool for the analysis and communication of ideas and arguments.

Arguing from consequences is speaking for or against the truth of a statement by appealing to the consequences it would have if true (or if false). But the fact that a proposition leads to some unfavorable result does not mean that it is false.

Misrepresenting the idea is much easier than refuting the evidence for it.

One type of appeal to irrelevant authority is the appeal to ancient wisdom, in which a belief is assumed to be true just because it originated some time ago.

A false dilemma is an argument that presents a limited set of two possible categories and assumes that everything in the scope of the discussion must be an element of that set.

When an appeal to fear proceeds to describe a series of terrifying events that will occur as a result of accepting a proposition—without clear causal links between them—it becomes reminiscent of a slippery slope argument.

An ad hominem argument (from the Latin for “to the man”) is one that attacks a person rather than the argument he or she is making, with the intention of diverting the discussion and discrediting their argument.