1. Fallacies of Presumption
Bianca Clark helped with this one….it gets weird…(or cool, but only if you are Bianca)

2. Sweeping Generalization
Yeah I said that…..
Applying a fair generalization, one usually true, to an exceptional case by ignoring the peculiarities of the case.
Examples:
“Since horseback riding is healthful exercise, Harry Brown ought to do more of it because it will be good for his heart condition.”
“The golden rule would have me help my neighbor. I should help them with Grapes of Wrath during Mr. Stearns’ class.”
Sweeping generalization differs from the fallacy of division . FOD involves the relations of physical groups or wholes to their physical parts or members. SG involves the misapplication of abstract rules, principles, or generalizations to cases properly falling under them.

3. Yeah…I said that too…and I think I am Daenerys. I have a dagron.
Hasty Generalization
Using insufficient evidence or an isolated example as the basis for a widely general conclusion.
Examples:
“My ex-boyfriend was mean. He taught me that all men are jerks.”
“I tried crush and hated it! All soda must be awful!”
“I got in trouble for helping someone with English in Mr. Stearns’ class. I will never help anyone again.”
HG differs from FOC the same way SG differs from FOD.
Rather than applying a generalization correctly, one makes an incorrect generalization.

4. Bifurication or False Dilemma
This is a tough dilemma.
Considering a distinction or classification exclusive and exhaustive when other alternatives exist.
Examples:
“ You are either for me or against me!”
“If you know about BMW, you either own one or you want one.”
What feeds this tendency to divide the world and the things in it in this way is the existence in our own vocabulary of numerous popular bipolar terms. We forget that these terms represent poles on a spectrum.

5. Examples From Leaders of the Free World!
Being Federici and Bianca is NOT a false dilemma….future leaders of the world….

6. Begging the Question
(1) Offering, as a premise, a simple restatement of the desired conclusion (A because of B, Where B is the same as A).
Example: “Miracles are impossible (A) because they cannot happen(B).”
(2) A circular argument, more complex than (1) but eventually justifying the conclusion with itself (A because of B, Where B is dependent on A).
Example: “We know God exists (A) because the Bible says so (B) and the Bible is the word of God (A).
(3) Subsuming a suspect particular under a generalization that is even more problematic (A because of B, Where Be is even more suspect than A).
Example: “Clearly he’s an atheist (A); he’s a philosopher (B)

7. Question Begging Epithets
Using strongly emotional language to force home an otherwise unsupported conclusion.
Examples:
“The scheming, bigoted efforts of the Board of Education have finally come to fruition.”
“This criminal is charged with the most vicious crime known to humanity.”
An epithet is a descriptive label or tag that we attach to a person, thing, or idea, often in an effort to condemn it.

8. Fallacy of Complex Question
Interrogative form of question begging (the question brings an assumption with it that needs to be questioned).
Examples:
“Why is it women are more interested in religion than men are?”
“How long have you been beating your wife?”
How long have you been keeping up with the Kardashians?

9. Special Pleading
Bianca says memes are so 2012 and does not approve.
Applying a double standard that is exemplified in the choice of words.
Examples:
“Horses sweat, men perspire, women glow.”
“The ruthless tactics of the enemy, his fanatical, suicidal attacks, have been foiled by the stern measures of our commanders and the devoted self-sacrifice of our troops.”
When we engage in special pleading, we favor ourselves and are prejudiced against others. We use double standards by applying different words to the same thing.

10. False Analogy
Bianca does however approve of Putin…she describes him as “adorable”, “like a baby deer”, and “cute”……..
Reaching a conclusion by likening or comparing two significantly incomparable cases. (Typically the two cases used will be similar but not in the respect that would warrant the conclusion in question.)
Examples:
“How can you tell your children not to take money from others when the government they live under does it all the time?”
Medical Student: "No one objects to a physician looking up a difficult case in medical books. Why, then, shouldn't students taking a difficult examination be permitted to use their textbooks?“
When we reason by analogy, we compare something that is obscure or difficult to something else that is known and understood. This is an acceptable way of arguing so long as the two things being compared are similar in important respects and differ only in minor ways. However, if it be the other way around (they are alike only in trifling ways and different in significant ways) then the analogy doesn’t hold, and we have a case of false or imperfect analogy.

11. False Cause Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
Inferring a causal link between two events when no such causal connection has been established. (Sequence alone is no proof of consequence.)
Examples:
“Have you noticed how sales went up after we instituted our new advertising campaign? Our success is obvious.”
“25 years after graduation, Harvard alumni have an average income 5 times higher than people of the same age who have no college education. If a person wants to be wealthy, he or she should enroll at Harvard.”
When Abby laughed the panda smiled, therefore Abby’s smile laugh made it smile.

12. Slippery Slope
Assuming, unjustifiably, that a proposed step will set off an undesirable and uncontrollable chain of events.
Examples:
“If Texas adopts a personal income tax, I'm moving away. An income tax at the state level is just a first step to communism.”

13. Irrelevant Thesis
Seeking, perhaps succeeding, to prove a conclusion not at issue.
Examples:
“I fail to see how hunting should be considered cruel when it gives tremendous pleasure to many people and employment to even more.”