nyuuzyou/wikis huggingface dataset:
Appeal to faith

An appeal to faith (or an appeal to belief) occurs when someone argues that you must first accept the truth of a statement in order to be able to rationally accept it.
The fallacy is a form of circular logic and an informal fallacy.
==Form==
In reaffirming believers:
In shutting down nonbelievers:
==Explanation==
Faith, by definition, is belief that does not rest on logic or evidence. Faith depends on irrational thought.
Saying that a belief is immune to criticism from nonbelievers is special pleading and never fails, making it circular logic.
==Examples==
*"Once you believe it, you will understand!"
*"If you accept the Lord, you will understand!"
*"If you would only take Maslow at his word, you would finally get it!"
*"The way in which I know Christianity is true is first and foremost on the basis of the witness of the Holy Spirit in my heart. And this gives me a self-authenticating means of knowing Christianity is true wholly apart from the evidence." — William Lane Craig combining an appeal to faith with several other fallacies, including an appeal to authority (and a faith-based one at that).
==See also==
===Want to read this in another language?===
==External links==
*Appeal to Faith — Logically Fallacious 
*Appeal to faith — C. George Boeree
*Logical Fallacy Lesson 7: Appeal to Faith — Rational Responders
Category:Circular reasoning
Category:Informal fallacies
Appeal to fear

An appeal to fear is a logical fallacy that occurs when a debater tries to scare people away from an opinion.
The fallacy is an appeal to consequences, an appeal to emotion, and an informal fallacy.
==Alternate names==
*argumentum ad metum
*argumentum in terrorem
*Believe it or Burn, whether at the stake or in Hell. 
*argument from intimidation
*scare tactic
==Form==
==See also==
*FUD
*Argumentum ad baculum
*Appeal to confidence
*Argumentum ad vanitatem
*Appeal to consequences
==External links==
*
*Appeal to Fear, Bruce Thompson
Category:Emotional appeals
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Totalitarianism
Appeal to fiction

An appeal to fiction (also generalizing from fictional evidence) is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone makes claims about reality based on evidence drawn from works of fiction.
==Explanation==
Fiction is not reality — it is driven in large part by considerations of being interesting to the audience rather than reflecting reality with 100% accuracy. Furthermore, fiction shows systemic bias in its distortion of reality; common deviations for the audience's benefit are catalogued and studied as tropes. Using fiction to argue about reality can therefore systematically skew your beliefs and expectations.
==Example==
*This tactic was deployed by Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia when he justified the use of torture on terrorism suspects by citing the television show 2424 IMDb. as evidence, stating "Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer? I don't think so."Scalia and Torture (Jun 19, 2007) by Andrew Sullivan The Atlantic.
*Just about anything to do with 1984.
*Atheist professor dropping a piece of chalk and it not breaking, after telling God to have it land intact, or variants.
*In Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, an Objectivist society (Galt’s Gulch) is depicted as creating a utopia. Needless to say, just because an economic system works in a fictional book does not prove that it would work in real life.
*In the 2007 film I Am Legend, based on the story by Richardson Matheson, an attempt to cure cancer backfires and causes people to mutate into ghoulish creatures. Anti-vaccination activists tried to cite the film to justify their wariness and skepticism about vaccinations, prompting the film’s screenwriter Akiva Goldsman to point out, “Oh. My. God. It’s a movie. I made it up. It’s. Not. Real.”I Am Legend screenwriter dismisses anti-vax claims based on film's plot, BBC.com (10 August 2021)'I Am Legend' screenwriter reacts to vaccine conspiracy theories, pointing out the plot is fiction, CNN.com (10 August 2021)Yes, ‘I Am Legend,’ the 2007 movie about zombie vampires, is now a part of the vaccine conversation, Washington Post (11 August 2021) (And what’s more, the film doesn’t even depict vaccines as the cause of the apocalypse but rather a genetically engineered measles virus.Fact check: A vaccine did not turn characters in the movie ‘I Am Legend’ into zombies , Reuters (18 December 2020) Was ‘I Am Legend’ Set in 2021? And was the "zombie outbreak" caused by a vaccine?, Snopes (12 January 2021))
==See also==
*Things to keep in mind before starting a conspiracy, mostly informed by fictional examples
==External links==
*Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgment of global risks, p. 9, Nick Bostrom
*The Logical Fallacy of Generalization from Fictional Evidence, on LessWrong
==References==
Category:Imprecision fallacies
Appeal to flattery

An appeal to flattery is a logical fallacy that occurs when a debater tries to compliment people into an opinion.
The fallacy is an emotional appeal and an informal fallacy.
==Alternate names==
*appeal to vanity
*argumentum ad vanitatem
*apple polishing
*sucking up
==Form==
The argument takes this form:
*Person A tells a premise that person B doesn't like. 
*To make person B more favorable towards this premise, person A attempts to flatter them by telling they are intelligent/attractive/otherwise desirable.
*If person B falls for this, they agree with A.
==Explanation==
Someone toadies someone else in order to appeal to them and make them more favorable towards a premise that they would not like otherwise. This kind of argumentation makes use of the Dunning-Kruger effect among other things if used successfully. It is virtually always fallacious, because it never looks into facts, but only exploits the basic human need for appreciation.
==Examples==
*You are a smart kid, you should know you shouldn't be smoking.
**While this is an attempt of making a valid point (smoking is unhealthy, and smoking when underage is even worse, we know that!), this argument fails to mention why smoking is actually bad, instead saying "if you are smart, you don't smoke; if you smoke, you are stupid".
*Pretty women deserve the best, let's make out!
*Doctor, as you clearly are a sharp and intelligent person, you should know that the resonance cascade allowed us to to teleport those caprian aliens to Earth's ignosphere on quasi-quantum level through pores on cheese.
==External links==
*
*Appeal to Flattery, Bruce Thompson
*Appeal to Flattery, Agnosticism/Atheism About.com
*Appeal to Flattery, Nizkor Project
Category:Latin phrases
Category:Emotional appeals
Category:Informal fallacies
Appeal to gravity

An appeal to gravity is a logical fallacy that occurs if the supposed importance (big impact) or seriousness of a situation makes someone's viewpoint stronger.
The fallacy is an emotional appeal and an informal fallacy.
==Form==
If discussing someone's ideas:
==Explanation==
The importance of a decision does not make any one choice of action any better or worse, and the seriousness of a choice of action does not change whether it actually solves a problem.
Appeals to gravity will usually be the person with the serious proposal (which can be just as laughable as the less serious proposals), the person seeking "balance between extremes" (who may manage to find the midpoint between two working solutions), the person "who wants to keep things civil" (and ignore ideas that aren't), or the person who finds some ideas ridiculous. This is because it's easier to criticize how other people discuss the issues than how they solve the issues.
In some cases, addressing issues with relative levity, particularly humor, encourages knowledge, awareness, and discussion of the issue to reach a wider audience (for instance, panel/talk shows and news satire on television). That said however, sometimes not taking things seriously can hurt discourse by making issues seem more or less important than they actually are.
==See also==
*Tone argument
==External links==
*Appeal to Gravity, Bruce Thompson
*Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Gravity, SeekFind.net
Category:Emotional appeals
Category:Informal fallacies
Appeal to hate

An appeal to hate is a logical fallacy that occurs when something is claimed to be true because (a) it is maddening or (b) its falsity would cause anger. Its inverse is the appeal to pity.
All poisoning the well arguments are an appeal to hate.
It is an emotional appeal and an informal fallacy.
==Alternate names==
*argumentum ad odium
*appeal to spite
==Form==
If the speaker hates the listener:
If the listener hates the speaker:
==Explanation==
Just because something makes you mad does not mean that it is more or less true.
==Examples==
*Don't listen to him, he's a [slur].
*Prior to meeting someone, you are told that they always try to get money from acquaintances. When you meet, everything you hear is tainted.
*Galileo claims that the Earth revolves around the Sun. But remember, he's heretic scum. Can you trust a man like that?
*Why shouldn't prisoners be forced to do hard labor? Prisons are full of scumbags!
*How could you believe in God? He's such a horrible tyrant!
*I will vote for Him because He annoys people like you!
==See also==
*Appeal to money
*Appeal to shame
*Appeal to pride
*Poisoning the well
===Want to read this in another language?===
==External links==
*
*Fallacy: Appeal to Spite, Nizkor Project
*Appeal to Spite, ESGS
Category:Emotional appeals
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Latin phrases
Appeal to identity

An appeal to identity asserts that the soundness of an argument stands or falls based on the identity of the arguer. In particular, this identity is often a political, racial, gender, or sexual identity.
In this sense, the appeal to identity is closely related to the genetic fallacy, poisoning the well, tokenism, and the ad hominem fallacy.
==Form==
*P1: X asserts Y is true.
*P2: X identifies as the same group I do.
*C: Y is true.
*P1: X asserts Y is true.
*P2: X identifies in a group I hate.
*C: Y is false.
*P1: X asserts Y is false.
*P2: X identifies as the same group I do.
*C: Y is false.
*P1: X asserts Y is false.
*P2: X identifies in a group I hate.
*C: Y is true.
==Examples==
*Radical lesbian separatism
*Cranky gender essentialism
*TERFs
*Gendercide
*White (or majority race) identity politics
*Milo Yiannopoulos
*Blaire White
*Alt-right & white supremacy
*FEMra
*Race and intelligence
*Christian Identity
*Islamophobia
*Galileo gambit
*Pseudoskepticism
*Sheeple
*Shill gambit?
==See also==
*Bulverism — the original example given was a case of this argument as well
*Friend argument
*Nationalism
==External links==
*Appeal to Identity, Journey to the Unknown
*Imgur Post
==References==
Category:Appeals to authority
Category:Ad hominem
Appeal to money

An appeal to money is a logical fallacy that occurs when money is associated with truth or quality. 
* An appeal to wealth (argumentum ad crumenam) occurs when more money involved means something is truer or better, exploiting the impression that money flows from intelligence or work. 
* An appeal to poverty (argumentum ad lazarum) occurs when less money involved means something is truer or better, exploiting the impression that money corrupts. 
Inverse forms of these fallacies (people who are poor are wrong, rather than right) are also common. Although very rarely encountered, it's possible that a "middle" amount of money might be considered a good thing (perhaps "appeal to middle class").
The fallacy is an emotional appeal, generally considered an informal fallacy, though experimental evidence bears out the appeal to poverty. A 2017 study by Igor Grossmann and Justin Brienza at the University of Waterloo in Canada found that poor and working class people are more likely to show "wisdom", defined as the ability to consider opposing perspectives and find a compromise that defuses an interpersonal dispute, than those in higher socioeconomic classes.Michael Price. "The lower your social class, the ‘wiser’ you are, suggests new study". Science, 2017-12-20. doi:10.1126/science.aar8218Justin P. Brienza, Igor Grossmann. " Social class and wise reasoning about interpersonal conflicts across regions, persons and situations". Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 2017-12-20. Accessed 2017-12-23. doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.1870
==Form==
==Explanation==
Smart people can be poor, dumb people can be rich, and vice versa. Socrates, Sun-Tzu, and Spinoza were all poor when compared to the likes of Donald Trump, Mike Adams, and Alex Jones, but are the latter better than the former?
==Examples==
===Poverty===
*The Watchtower Society is a non-profit organization, and nobody is getting rich on all this. Isn't that what God wants?
*Poor, but honest.
*Priests and nuns are more likely to possess insight into the meaning of life because they have given up the distractions of wealth.
*All you need to know about the civil war in that country is that the rebels live in mud huts, while the general who sends troops against them sits in a luxurious, air-conditioned office.
*
===Wealth===
*If you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?
*It costs more, so it must be better.
==External links==
*
*Appeal to Money, Atheism/Agnosticism About.com
*Appeal to Money, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
*Argumentum ad Crumenam, Art Russel
*Appeal to Poverty, Debating with Jehovah's Witnesses
*argumentum ad crumenam, philosophical society
== References ==
Category:Emotional appeals
Appeal to mystery

An appeal to mystery is a logical fallacy which argues, as an explanation for something, that there can be no explanation.
The fallacy is an appeal to ignorance and an informal fallacy.
==Form==
==Explanation==
If something is unexplainable (unknowable, etc.), then it functionally cannot be asserted to be true, because the evidence necessary to prove its truth is also unknown. (Consider attempting to prove that "Xydlgrp" is true, without knowing anything about it.)
The fallacy is appealing not least because "mystery" is interesting and because, as noted below, epistemic doubt is a reality. However, lack of knowledge cannot prove anything to be true.
==Examples==
*Common words used to express this fallacy are "mysterious," "inscrutable," "ineffable," etc.
*Invoking "the romance of the unknowable": "What a dull world it would be if everything were known!"
*
===Theology===
*Are you above God? Do you pretend to understand God? etc.
*We cannot know why God allows suffering. Who can fathom the ways of the creator?
*Theists often claim that God is unknowable, which somehow exempts God from logical disproof. This, however, prevents asserting that God exists at all.
*Other aspects of religion are often relegated to the realm of faith, because they are "beyond reason".http://marccortez.com/2014/03/13/theological-mystery/
==Distinction from legitimate doubt==
==See also==
*Falsifiability
*Science doesn't know everything
*Science was wrong before
==External links==
*Appeal to Mystery, SeekFind
==Notes==
==References==
Category:Informal fallacies
Appeal to novelty

The appeal to novelty is the fallacious claim that an idea or product is good — simply by virtue of being novel or new.
==Alternate names==
*argumentum ad novitatem
*appeal to modernity/progress
*argument of the new
==Form==
The general form of the argument is as follows.
As a syllogism, this is valid. The fallacy lies in the unstated minor premise. New ideas or new products that are untried or untested are not inevitably better. There are cases when new is better, for example, many foodstuffs are better fresh but in many other cases, age does not affect the value of a product.
==Examples==
#"Let's buy the latest version of the software. It must be better!"
#In the late 1990s when the Internet appeared to be the future of pretty much everything, many "dotcom" businesses found easy financial backing, simply because they were part of the "World Wide Web", regardless of their lack of a good business plan or experience.
#"A change in government will fix things!"
==Western culture==
Western culture includes a strong memeplex implying that new things are superior to old things. Westerners believe in progress and have experienced scientific advances which lead to westerners getting many new products and benefiting from new processes which we value. Sometimes, we hope desperately that further scientific advance will solve problems like global warming. Advertising encourages us to believe that new is better even when the main novelty is in packaging.
==Reverse position==
The reverse position of the appeal to novelty would be the appeal to tradition. This is also fallacious since, as a rule, age does not improve quality.
==See also==
*Logical fallacy
*Conservatism
*Planned obsolescence — a great demonstration of why a newer product may actually be worse
*Progress
==External links==
*Fallacy: Appeal to Novelty, Nizkor Project
*Appeal to Novelty, Changing Minds
*Appeal to Novelty, Logically Fallacious
*Appeal to Progress, Bruce Thompson
*Fallacy of Novelty, Agnosticism/Atheism About.com
*Bandwagon, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Latin phrases
Appeal to pity

An appeal to pity is a logical fallacy that occurs when something is claimed to be true because (a) it is saddening or (b) its falsity would cause sadness. Its inverse is the appeal to hate.
It is an emotional appeal and an informal fallacy.
==Alternate names==
*argumentum ad misericordiam
*appeal to sympathy
*Galileo argument (not to be confused with Galileo gambit)
==Form==
If overlaying some text on a sad puppy image:
If someone tearfully demands a better grade:
==Explanation==
Just because something is sad does not mean that it is more or less true.
==Examples==
*I couldn't afford to go to college, and I can't understand those fancy arguments you're using. But I've read my Bible, and it'd break my heart if it wasn't true.
*Bob was an orphan, raised by a stepfather who had to work menial jobs all day to make ends meet. 
*I know Scruffles has rabies, slaughters other pets, and destroys furniture, but I love him and you can't take him away!
*Officer, you can't give me a traffic ticket for running a red light: I'm going to the hospital to see my wife in critical condition to tell her I lost my job, the house burned down, and the car will be repossessed.
==See also==
*Appeal to money
*Appeal to pride
*Appeal to shame
===Want to read this in another language?===
==External links==
*
*APPEAL TO PITY, Logically Fallacious
*Appeal to Pity (Argumentum ad Misercordiam), Atheism/Agnosticism About.com
*Fallacy: Appeal to Pity, Nizkor Project
*Appeal to Pity (the Galileo Argument), Charles McGlothlin
*Argumentum ad Misericordiam, philosophy.lander.edu
*APPEAL TO PITY, Truly Fallacious
*Appeal to Pity, Changing Minds
*Appeal to Pity, LogicalFallacies.info
*Appeal to Pity, Hebrew for Christians
Category:Emotional appeals
Category:Latin phrases
ru:Обращение к жалости
Appeal to shame

An appeal to shame is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone's actions or arguments are described as "shameful" (meaning, looked down upon by others in society) and therefore wrong.
The fallacy is an appeal to emotion and an informal fallacy.
==Alternate names==
*appeal to guilt
*political correctness
*appeal to pride
*argumentum ad superbium
*ad hominem ridicule
*appeal to humor
*appeal to mockery
*appeal to ridicule
*horse laugh
*refutation by caricature
==Form==
Someone holds a shameful opinion:
Someone shameful holds an opinion:
===Appeal to ridicule===
An appeal to ridicule is an appeal to shame with mocking laughter in the background. The fallacy occurs when the sole purpose of an argument is to make people laugh at someone, and use that social pressure to force someone to change their beliefs. While humor can be useful (especially in reductio ad absurdum arguments), it is not the primary point of an argument, and mocking should never be.
===Appeal to pride===
An appeal to pride is an inverse form of an appeal to shame. Instead of saying that something is shameful, something is described as something you should be proud of, e.g., "aren't you proud of our troops?"
==Examples==
*"Aren't you ashamed for having that opinion?"
*"Only the most degenerate, morally depraved, cretinous imbecile would disagree with me."
*May be combined with Godwin's law (for example: Aren't you ashamed to be in favor of building highways, just as Hitler did?)
*Oh, you're only 13. You can't have an interest in economics.
==See also==
*Essay:Appeal to ridicule (written by an anti-RW member)
*Straw Man
*Appeal to fear
*Argumentum ad fastidium
*"Degenerate", an common appeal to shame used by conservatives
==External links==
*
*Appeal to Ridicule, Nizkor Project
*Appeal to Guilt, Bruce Thompson
*ARGUMENT FROM INTIMIDATION, Objectivism
Category:Emotional appeals
Category:Latin phrases
Appel à la foi

L'appel à la foi se produit lorsque quelqu'un affirme qu'il faut accepter, avant tout, la vérité d'une proposition pour y croire rationnellement.
Le sophisme est un type de raisonnement circulaire et un sophisme informel.
==Forme==
En réaffirmant les partisans :
En bâillonnant les non-partisans :
==Explication==
La foi, par définition, est la croyance qui ne repose pas sur ni la logique ni la preuve. La foi dépend de la pensée irrationnelle.
Affirmer qu'une croyance est à l'abri des critiques de non-partisans est une plaidoirie spéciale et n'échoue jamais, ce qui en fait un type de raisonnement circulaire.
==Exemples==
*« Une fois qu'on y croit, on comprendra ! »
*« Si vous acceptez le Seigneur, vous comprendrez ! »
*« Si seulement vous croyiez Maslow sur parole, vous comprendriez enfin ! »
*« La façon dont je sais que le christianisme est vrai, c'est avant tout sur la base du témoignage du Saint-Esprit dans mon cœur. Et cela me donne un moyen, qui est tenu pour authentique, de savoir que le christianisme est vrai entièrement en dehors de la preuve. » — William Lane Craig, qui combine un appel à la foi avec plusieurs autres sophismes, y compris un appel à l'autorité (qui est basé sur la foi).
==Voir aussi==
===Versions en autres langues===
==Liens externes==
*Appeal to Faith — Logically Fallacious 
*Appeal to faith — C. George Boeree
*Logical Fallacy Lesson 7: Appeal to Faith — Rational Responders
Category:Français
Category:Logique
Appel à la haine

L'appel à la haine (en latin argumentum ad odium) se produit lorsque quelque chose est prétendu être vrai car (a) il est exaspérant ou (b) sa fausseté causerait de la colère. Son inverse est l'appel à la pitié.
Tous les arguments qui reposent sur l'empoisonnement du puits sont un appel à la haine.
C'est un appel à l'émotion et un sophisme informel.
==Forme==
Si la personne qui parle déteste la personne qui écoute :
Si la personne qui écoute déteste la personne qui parle :
==Explication==
Juste parce que quelque chose vous met en colère ne signifie pas qu'il est plus ou moins vrai.
==Exemples==
*Ne l'écoute pas, il est [insulte].
*Avant de rencontrer quelqu'un, on vous dit qu'il essaie toujours d'escroquer de l'argent à leurs connaissances. Lorsque vous le rencontrez, tout ce que vous entendez parler est terni.
*Galilée affirme que la Terre tourne autour du Soleil. Mais rappelez-vous, c'est une ordure hérétique. Peut-on faire confiance à un homme comme ça ?
*Pourquoi ne pas obliger les prisonniers de faire des travaux forcés ? Les prisons sont pleines de salauds !
*Pourquoi peux-tu croire en Dieu ? C'est un si horrible tyran !
*Je vais voter pour Lui parce qu'Il ennuie des gens de votre espèce !
==Voir aussi==
===Versions en autres langues===
==Liens externes==
*Voir l'article de Wikipédia sur l'appel à la haine.
==Notes==
Category:Français
Category:Logique