Portal:The Art Of Logic

Fallacies of Relevance

1. Ad Hominem (aka Argumentum ad Hominem or Personal Attack) - A person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.
2. Bandwagon Fallacy
3. Fallacist’s Fallacy
4. Fallacy of Composition
5. Fallacy of Division
6. Gambler’s Fallacy
7. Genetic Fallacy
8. Irrelevant Appeals
   1. Appeal to Antiquity / Tradition
   2. Appeal to Authority
   3. Appeal to Consequences
   4. Appeal to Force
   5. Appeal to Novelty
   6. Appeal to Pity
   7. Appeal to Popularity
   8. Appeal to Poverty
   9. Appeal to Wealth
9. Moralistic Fallacy
10. Naturalistic Fallacy
11. Red Herring
12. Weak Analogy

Fallacies of Ambiguity

1. Accent Fallacies
2. Equivocation Fallacy
3. Straw Man Fallacy

Fallacies of Presumption

1. Affirming the Consequent
2. Arguing from Ignorance
3. Begging the Question / Circular Reasoning - Merely assuming what one is trying to prove.
   1. Epithet - This could be considered a specific sub-type of begging the question. Uses descriptive words that skew the weight of meaning in the question.
4. Complex Question Fallacy - Loads an assumption into the question.
5. Cum Hoc Fallacy
6. False Dilemma / Bifurcation Fallacy
7. Hasty Generalisation Fallacy
8. ‘No True Scotsman’ Fallacy
9. Post Hoc Fallacy
10. Slippery Slope Fallacy
11. Sweeping Generalisation Fallacy
12. Subjectivist Fallacy
13. Tu Quoque Fallacy
14. Myth - What is myth? "the presentation of facts belonging to one category in the idioms appropriate to another." TF Torrance citing G. Ryle

e.g. This would or could explain why Roger Olson thinks that Evangelical Calvinism is inconsistent; he is thinking in mythic terms relative to the terms and expectations and grammar that EC is seeking to operate from.