Fallacy Pillows

Description: i could agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

Description: The Think of the Children Fallacy occurs when someone invokes an appeal to emotion involving theoretical harm to children to avoid addressing an actual argument.

Description: A definition of a logical fallacy, as described by the Fallacious Trump Podcast

Description: The Single Cause Fallacy is committed when the speaker assumes a complex outcome to have one cause, thereby making it easier to blame on somebody or propose a solution. The reality is that many real-world issues are caused by a combination of factors, some of which may even be too complex for us to be aware of. Oversimplifying issues does not help us to talk about them with reason and logic.

Description: The Traitorous Critic Fallacy, or Ergo Decedo, is a fallacy where someone dismisses a person with genuine complaints by telling them if they don't like it, they can leave. It's a way of avoiding dealing with the complaint itself and branding the complainer as unworthy of being part of 'our' group.

Description: The Magical Thinking Fallacy is committed when someone claims that a real world outcome is the result of a magical cause or process, such as a wish, jinx or curse.

Description: The False Balance Fallacy is committed when someone suggests that both sides of an issue are equally worthy of debate or consideration, even when most or all the evidence favors one side.

Description: The Alleged Certainty Fallacy is committed when someone makes a claim and then alleges that everyone knows it's true, thereby avoiding the need to offer any evidence.

Description: The fallacy of the Faulty Analogy is committed when you assume that because two things are alike in one way, then they are alike in all ways.

Description: The Greater Good Fallacy is committed when someone claims you should accept their argument or make some sacrifice because it's for the greater good of everyone.

Description: The Rhetorical Question Fallacy is a way of accusing people of something while appearing to be 'just asking questions'. Often the questions being asked have already been debunked or already have a satisfactory answer.

Description: The fallacy of Hasty Generalization is committed when an assumption is made based on too little information. It may, for example, be that a small sample of a large group has been observed, and the properties of this sample are assumed to be present in the larger group.

Description: A humorous design for mathematicians, physics students, and STEM nerds who understand the power of a confusingly confident proof.

Description: Correlation/causation mix-up? This tee playfully nods to the subtle but crucial difference, especially relevant in psychology and therapy. A thought-provoking conversation starter.

Description: Make a bold, logical statement with this "CORRELATION $\neq$ CAUSATION" design. Featuring a rugged, distressed white block typography layout centered around a classic mathematical symbol, this high-contrast graphic pops perfectly against dark backgrounds. It captures the essential rule of statistics and logic with a raw, industrial aesthetic. An outstanding print option for comfortable everyday t-shirts, cozy late-night hoodies, heavy canvas tote bags, and bold laptop stickers. This makes a phenomenal gift for data scientists, math teachers, researchers, or anyone who spends their day running complex technical analysis and looking at charts.

Description: The Halo Effect is a cognitive bias that leads people to base their whole opinion of someone on a single positive or negative trait.

Description: Conspiracy theorists often create unfalsifiable arguments, using a combination of goalpost moving, arguments from ignorance and circular logic.

Description: The Overextended Outrage Fallacy is committed when an isolated or infrequent incident is used to demonize a whole group of people.

Description: The Accelerating Truth Fallacy is committed when someone uses their own previous assertions as evidence or proof that those assertions are true.

Description: The Morton's Fork Fallacy is committed when someone suggests two seemingly different choices actually lead to the same negative result.

Description: The Gotcha Argument is used by people who are backing into a corner and unable to answer a tough question. So they accuse their opponent of asking a 'gotcha' question.

Description: The Survivorship Bias Fallacy is committed when someone makes an argument based on a biased sample that only includes items that have survived some kind of selection pressure.

Description: The Wrong Tool Fallacy is committed when someone tries to present evidence for their argument, but the method or tool they are using isn't designed to show what they claim it shows.

Description: The fallacy of Factoid Propagation is committed when someone uses a 'fact' they heard to support their position, without knowing (or caring) if the fact is true or not.

Description: The Promised Proof Fallacy is committed when someone can't back up their claims with anything other than some currently non-existent proof that they claim will appear later.

Description: The Circular Reasoning fallacy is committed when someone makes at least two claims, each of which is offered as evidence for the other.

Description: The Silent Majority Fallacy is committed when someone assumes all or most of the people who aren't vocally disagreeing with them, in fact agree with them.

Description: The Amazing Familiarity Fallacy is committed when someone makes an argument based on information they couldn't possibly have, such as what someone else is thinking.

Description: The Fractal Wrongness Fallacy is committed when someone's argument is based on logic or premises so wrong that they are wrong at every level from detail to worldview.

Description: Tu Quoque literally means “You too.” It’s a particular type of Red Herring fallacy where the speaker avoids responding to a criticism by distracting the listener with claims that other people (ideally the one doing the criticizing) have also done similar bad things.

Description: Ad Hominem is Latin for 'to the man' and describes an argument where the focus of the attack is not on the views a person holds but on the person themselves. It is an attempt to distract from the matter at hand by introducing irrelevant details aimed at discrediting the individual.

Description: This fallacy, sometimes called ‘Missing the Point’, is committed when someone provides evidence refuting or proving a point which is irrelevant to the issue at hand. This can often be a quite effective distraction, but as it does not address the real question, it remains fallacious.

Description: Special Pleading describes a situation where you have a rule that you apply to everyone else, but make up an excuse to explain why the rule doesn’t apply to you. When you are inconsistent in applying the rules in this way without a valid logical reason, you are using fallacious reasoning.

Description: The Subverted Support Fallacy is committed when someone tries to describe or explain a phenomenon without first providing any evidence that the phenomenon exists at all. It is a form of Begging the Question in that the existence of the phenomenon is assumed.

Description: The False Consensus fallacy occurs when someone makes an argument based on their assumption that most other peoples behaviour, beliefs, thoughts and motivations are the same as their own.

Description: The Red Baiting Fallacy is committed when someone calls their opponent a communist or a socialist based on little or no evidence and in order to avoid engaging with their actual arguments.