Ad hominem: When you can't attack the argument, attack the person making it.

Slippery slope arguments assume that one small step will inevitably lead to catastrophic consequences, without evidence for the causal chain.

Appeal to authority: The truth of a claim doesn't depend on who says it, but on the evidence supporting it.

False dilemma: Presenting two options as the only possibilities when others exist.

Straw man: Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.

Appeal to nature: Assuming that what is natural is inherently good or better.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc: Assuming that because B followed A, A must have caused B.

Begging the question: When the conclusion is assumed in the premises.

Appeal to emotion: Manipulating feelings rather than using valid reasoning.

Hasty generalization: Drawing a conclusion from insufficient evidence.

Red herring: Introducing an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue.

Tu quoque: Deflecting criticism by accusing the critic of the same fault.

Appeal to tradition: Assuming something is better or correct because it's been done that way for a long time.

No true Scotsman: Changing the definition of a category to exclude counterexamples.

Genetic fallacy: Judging something based solely on its origin rather than its current merits.

False analogy: Assuming that because two things are similar in some ways, they must be similar in others.

Loaded question: Asking a question that contains an unjustified assumption.

Appeal to ignorance: Arguing that something must be true because it hasn't been proven false.

Bandwagon fallacy: Arguing that something must be true or good because many people believe it.

Circular reasoning: When the reason given is just a restatement of the conclusion.

Fallacies are like intellectual shortcuts that lead to dead ends.

The most dangerous fallacies are those that confirm our existing biases.

Spotting fallacies in others' arguments is easy; recognizing them in our own thinking is wisdom.

Fallacies persist because they feel right emotionally, even when they're wrong logically.

A valid argument can contain false premises, and a sound argument can be fallaciously presented.

The purpose of studying fallacies isn't to win arguments, but to avoid losing to faulty reasoning.

Fallacies are the cognitive equivalent of optical illusions - they trick our mental processes.

Many political arguments are built on fallacies because they're effective at persuading, not because they're logically sound.

Recognizing fallacies is the first step toward clearer thinking; avoiding them is the second.