Skip to content
Check My Logic
Check My Logic

Category

Informal fallacies

An informal fallacy is an argument that fails for reasons you can’t see from its shape alone. The flaw is in the content: the reasons offered don’t bear on the conclusion, an assumption is doing work it hasn’t earned, or a word quietly changes meaning halfway through.

Unlike formal fallacies, most informal fallacies depend on context. Questioning someone’s reliability is a fallacy when it replaces a response to their argument, and entirely reasonable when you’re being asked to take their word for something. That’s why every entry here has a section on when it isn’t an error.

Entries (8)

The traditional groups

Informal fallacies are usually sorted into three broad families. The boundaries are loose and textbooks disagree about where some fallacies go.

  • Relevance. The premises don’t actually bear on the conclusion. Attacking the arguer instead of the argument (Attacking the person, or ad hominem) is the classic case.
  • Presumption. The argument depends on an assumption that hasn’t been established, such as a false choice between two options or a conclusion smuggled into the premises.
  • Ambiguity. A word or phrase is used in two senses, so the argument only seems to connect.

Naming it is not refuting it

Calling out an informal fallacy is a starting point, not a verdict. The useful follow-up is always the same question: does this flaw actually undermine the conclusion here? Treating “that’s a fallacy” as a winning move is its own reasoning error, and a common one.

Informal fallacies and biases

An informal fallacy belongs to an argument. A Cognitive bias belongs to a person’s judgment. They often travel together: a bias makes a certain bad argument feel convincing, and that argument then gets written down.

Other categories: Formal fallacies · Cognitive biases