1.  Non- resiquitur

It a Latin word that means “it does not follow”. In this fallacy, the conclusion of the argument does not follow the first two premises therefore making the whole argument invalid. The fallacy occurs when the speaker either affrims the consequent or denies the antecedent. In simple terms the antecedent is the one introduced by the word “if”, and the consequent is introduced by the word “then”. Even outside debates we commit this fallacy, an example to that is;

“All students in that school are intelligent

 But, I am intelligent

 Therefore, I am studying in that school.”

• Denying the antecedent

1. If A is true, then B is true.
2. A is stated to be false.
3. Therefore B must be false.

Example:

If I am a student, then I am learning something

I am not a student

Therefore, I am not learning something

• Affirming the consequent

1. If A is true, then B is true.
2. B is stated to be true.
3. Therefore, A must be true.

Example:

If Gerry got perfect in the test, then he will get a good grade

He got a good grade

Therefore, Gerry got perfect in the test.

2.  Argumentum ad Misericordiam

This fallacy means “Appeal to Pity”. The speaker appeals to the people to have pity on him instead of answering the argument thrown against his. A good example to that is:

(A man is guilty of robbing a store)

“Please do not put me to jail, I only did that because I have three kids and a wife to feed.”

3.  Argumentum ad Vericundiam

This fallacy means “a statement of an authority outside his specialty”. Although some of them may actually say things (as an opinion) outside their profession, it does not apply to debates. For example:

An economist saying, “The unusual rise and fall of the Earth’s temperature is due to Global warming.”

A barber saying, “It is by accepting that one’s right has limitation that he gains freedom.”

4.  Argumentum ad Populum

This fallacy means “appeal to people”. Instead of speaking against the argument of the opponent, the speaker tries to win the mass by appealing to them. One of the most popular example of this fallacy happened during the Marcos regime in the Philippines. It was in the middle of the Martial Law when former President Cory Aquino appealed to the people saying, “Tama na, sobra na, palitan na.” In English it means, “Enough damage has already been done, it’s time for us to change the government.”

5.  Argumentum ad Ignorantiam

In this fallacy, the speaker assumes that because a statement is yet unproven, it is false. There are two basic patterns of this fallacy:

1. Statement p is unproved, therefore p is not true
2. Statement not-p is unproved, therefore p is true.

You can find topics at Interesting Debate Topics and Tips on How to Debate Effectively. God Bless You All!