Here’s the top 25 list of logical fallacies:

  1. Ad Hominem (Attacking the Person): Attacking the character of the person making the argument rather than the argument itself.
  1. Straw Man: Misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to defeat.
  1. Appeal to Pity: Evoking emotion (pity) to win an argument rather than using reason.
  1. Bandwagon Fallacy: Assuming something is valid because many people believe it.
  1. False Dichotomy: Presenting only two extreme options when there might be more nuanced possibilities.
  1. Slippery Slope: Arguing that one small step will inevitably lead to a catastrophic outcome, often based on speculation.
  1. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (After This, Therefore Because of This): Assuming that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second.
  1. Begging the Question: Assuming the truth of the conclusion you are trying to prove.
  1. Equivocation: Shifting the meaning of a key term in the argument.
  1. Circular Reasoning: Restating your claim as evidence for itself.
  1. Non Sequitur (Does Not Follow): A conclusion that doesn’t logically follow from the premises.
  1. Appeal to Authority: Relying on the opinion of an expert or authority figure, even when their expertise may not be relevant to the topic at hand.
  1. Appeal to Emotion: Using emotional language or imagery to manipulate the audience rather than presenting sound reasoning and evidence.
  1. Red Herring: Introducing an irrelevant issue to distract from the main argument.
  1. Hasty Generalization: Making a broad, sweeping conclusion based on a small or unrepresentative sample.
  1. Gambler’s Fallacy: Believing that the probability of an event changes based on past occurrences (particularly in games of chance).
  1. Genetic Fallacy: Judging an argument or idea based on its origin, rather than evaluating it on its own merits.
  1. Appeal to Nature: Assuming that what is “natural” is inherently good or right, and what is “unnatural” is inherently bad or wrong.
  1. False Equivalence: Presenting two different things as if they are morally or logically equivalent.
  1. No True Scotsman: Redefining a group or label to exclude examples that don’t fit your desired definition.
  1. Anecdotal Evidence: Using personal stories or isolated examples as if they were representative of a general trend.
  1. Burden of Proof (Shifting the): Expecting an opponent to prove something negative or to disprove an un-falsifiable claim.
  1. Composition/Division Fallacy: Assuming that what’s true of a part must be true of the whole (composition) or what’s true of the whole must be true of its parts (division).
  1. Loaded Question: Phrasing a question in a way that subtly presumes something negative or controversial while limiting the answers possible.
  1. Tu Quoque (“You Too”): Dismissing someone’s argument because they don’t follow their own advice (hypocrisy).