Fallacy Pillows

Description: Truth Rejection occurs when someone addresses a question by specifically mentioning a particular response they won't accept - which happens to be the truth.

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: The Blinded by AI Fallacy occurs when someone bases their claim on an unrealistic view of what artificial intelligence is currently capable of reliably achieving.

Description: Make a bold, logical statement with this "CORRELATION $\neq$ CAUSATION" black text 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 Calling Cards Fallacy occurs when someone dismisses a valid point by accusing their opponent of playing a rhetorical card.

Description: The Ad Nauseam logical fallacy refers to a situation where someone asserts a claim repeatedly, often even after the claim has been debunked, in the hope that people will start to believe it through sheer repetition and that people will get sick of trying to refute it so they will simply give up.

Description: Correlation vs. Causation: A tee for critical thinking! Embrace logic & scientific mindset. Great gift for those seeking truth.

Description: The Argument from Personal Incredulity describes a situation where someone dismisses a claim for no other reason than they find it difficult to believe. In fact, the person may be having trouble believing something simply because it doesn’t conform to how they currently think, or even that they simply don’t understand some element of the claim. However, rather than asking for more information or an explanation, the claim is dismissed as false because it seems unlikely to them.

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: The Passing the Buck Fallacy occurs when someone attempts to avoid responsibility by claiming someone else is to blame for their actions. https://fallacioustrump.com/ft157/

Description: Begging the Question is one of those phrases that has come to mean something different over time. Colloquially, it is used to mean ‘raising the question’, but the original meaning is the one invoked by this fallacy, and it’s fun to point out that people are using the phrase wrong, once you’ve explained that tomatoes are fruits and reminded them on the difference between poisonous and venomous.

Description: The Argument by Vehemence is committed when someone gets loud, angry or indignant in place of making an actual argument.

Description: The Argument from Antiquity is a fallacy where the arguer claims that something is right or good because it's traditional. If a person claims that we should do something a certain way because "that's the way it's always been done" or that a particular herb must have great healing properties because it's been used for thousands of years, they are using an argument from antiquity.

Description: The fallacy of Ignoring Linear Time is committed when someone acts like because something hasn't happened yet then it can't or won't happen.

Description: The Appeal to Nature is committed when someone assumes that something that is natural is therefore good, or something that is unnatural or artificial is therefore bad.

Description: The Argument by Gibberish Fallacy is committed when someone uses jargon or nonsense in place of an argument or an answer because they are unable to provide a coherent, useful or logical response.

Description: Lying with Statistics can involve using highly specific numbers to make it seem like you know what you're talking about, using a true statistic out of context to bolster a particular point of view, or simply using made up statistics and hoping your opponent doesn't check them.

Description: The Argumentum ad Fastidium, or Argument from Disgust, occurs when someone claims that because they find something unpleasant that means it is morally or factually wrong.

Description: The Appeal to Common Sense fallacy occurs when someone invokes "common sense" as a reason to believe something instead of providing evidence.

Description: The Appeal to the Law is committed when someone equates the legality of an act with its morality, i.e. saying whatever they did was fine, because there's no law against it.

Description: People often make decisions based on emotion rather than logic, so appealing to that emotion can be a very useful technique when you're trying to persuade someone. However, to be part of an effective logical argument emotion has to be used to back up the argument, rather than form the primary basis of the argument. When, instead, you simply try to scare them into agreeing with you, your argument is fallacious.

Description: The Argument by Slogan Fallacy is committed when someone uses a short snappy phrase to avoid making an argument that actually requires some nuance, explanation or evidence.

Description: The Appeal to Loyalty Fallacy is committed when someone suggests you should believe a truth claim due to the loyalty you feel to the person making the claim, or suggests that if you don't believe something you are being disloyal.

Description: The Ad Hominem Circumstantial Fallacy is committed when, instead of addressing someone's argument, you question the reason that they are making the argument, often suggesting that their circumstances mean that they benefit in some way from such an argument.

Description: The Argument by Rhyme Fallacy is committed when someone uses a rhyming slogan in place of an argument in an attempt to sway opinion or simplify a complex issue.

Description: The If By Whiskey Fallacy is committed when someone either takes such a non-committal stance on an issue that they could be supporting either side, or redefines the terms of the question to answer in the way they want to answer.

Description: The Appeal to Fame Fallacy occurs when someone equates fame with being trustworthy

Description: Appeal to Force, or Argumentum Ad Baculum, is a fallacy where someone tries to use pressure or threat to get their opponent to accept their position instead of using logical arguments and persuasion.

Description: The Failing Occam's Razor Fallacy is committed when someone ignores an obvious or simple explanation for something and chooses a far-fetched hypothesis instead.

Description: The Argument from Consequences occurs when someone makes a truth claim based on how good (or bad) things would be if the claim was in fact true.

Description: The Argumentum ad Lunam Fallacy is committed when someone compares putting a man on the moon (or another very hard thing that has been achieved) to a hard thing that has yet to be achieved.

Description: The Argument from Silence Fallacy is committed when someone assumes that no response from their opponent is proof that they are right.