COMMON LOGICAL FALLACIES

Non sequitur (Latin: ‘it does not follow’.)
A conclusion or statement that seems to draw a conclusion not supported by the premises. Many logical fallacies are types of non sequiturs but many can be related to some more specific logical error.

Statements often appear to be a non sequitur because the writer has failed to include the assumptions that establish connections between ideas. e.g. God sent this earthquake to punish those people for their wickedness.

Ad hominem (attacking the person, abusive fallacy, poisoning the well)
Instead of addressing the claims of an argument or position, attacking the personal character or reputation of the person making the argument.
e.g. I will not answer your question because you are an idiot.

The link between the personal attack and the matter at issue depends on the identification of the logical validity of the argument with the moral integrity of the speaker. In practice, we accept many ad hominem arguments. Many actions, beliefs or material interests detract from the persuasiveness of a person's argument. e.g.
Councillor 1: We need to renew all the concrete footpaths in the city.
Councillor 2: Councillor 1 owns the only concrete production company in the county. He is driven by a huge profit motive.

Appeal to authority (argumentum ab auctoritate, irrelevant authority, false attribution)
When someone uses the testimony of an authority in order to warrant their conclusion, but the authority is not an expert in the field in question. Alleged authorities should only be used when the authority is reporting on his or her field of expertise, there is agreement in their field on the issue, and the person can be trusted.
e.g. Matt Damon was seen wearing Ray Ban sunglasses, so they must be the best quality sunglasses.

False Analogy (false equivalence, faulty analogy, appeal to equality, apples and oranges)
To assume that because two things are alike in one or more respects, they are necessarily alike in another respect.
e.g. People who buy stocks are no different to people who bet on horse racing. They both risk their money with little chance of making any.

Argumentum ad populum (appeal to widespread belief, bandwagon argument, appeal to the majority)
Where a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because many people believe it to be so. A fallacy of relevancey similar to an appeal to authority.
e.g. Nine out of ten dentists recommend Listerine.

Begging the question (petitio principii.)
When an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.
e.g. We know that the bible is divinely inspired because in the third chapter of II Timothy it says that ‘all scripture is given by divine inspiration of God.’

Faulty Generalisation
When we we make a generalization on the basis of insufficient evidence. Relying on too small of a sample or an unrepresentative sample to support a generalization. The premises are related to the conclusion but provide only support.
Often follows the format:
Proportion Q of the sample has attribute A.
Therefore, the proportion Q of the population has attribute A.
e.g. If one sees only white swans, one may think that all swans are white.
Other variants: fallacy of accident, no true Scotsman, cherry picking, false analogy, hasty-generalization, misleading vividness, overwhelming exception, pathetic fallacy, thought terminating cliché.

Post hoc (post hoc ergo propter hoc — after this, therefore because of this.)
(coincidental correlation, correlation proves causation, false cause)
X happened then Y happened. Therefore X caused Y.
e.g. The rooster crows every morning before the sun comes up. The rooster crowing must cause the sun to rise.

Appeal to ridicule (reductio ad absurdum, straw Man, appeal to emotion)
An argument is made by incorrectly presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous. (A type of Red Herring or Reductio ad absurdum.)
e.g. Evolution? Yes, I believe that my grandparents were monkeys — of course that makes sense.

Red Herring (fallacies of misdirection)
When attention is diverted from the real issue by introducing a proposition or argument with little or no relevance to the first. In general, any logical inference based on fake arguments, intended to replace the lack of real arguments or to replace implicitly the subject of the discussion.
e.g. I don't support gay marriage among homosexuals. Anyway, taxes on married people are ridiculously high.
e.g. A politician is asked about a certain policy but discusses a related topic instead.

Appeal to Ignorance (argument from ignorance, argumentum ad ignorantium)
The argument that a conclusion must be true (or false), because there is no evidence against (or for) it. Shifts the burden of proof away from the person making the claim.
e.g. Since you haven't proven your innocence, you must be guilty.
e.g. It makes sense to believe in UFOs because no one can prove they don't exist.

Appeal to Emotion (appeal to fear, flattery, pity, ridicule, spite, envy, hatred, superstition, pride etc.)
A general category of fallacies that use emotion in place of reason to attempt to win the argument. (A type of Red Herring.)
e.g. Roger didn't want to eat his brussel sprouts, but his father told him to think about the starving children in third world countries who had no food at all.