Sub-conclusions
A sub-conclusion is a mini-conclusion inside a bigger argument. It’s a statement that is supported by some premises (evidence or reasons) and, in turn, helps to support the main conclusion of the argument.
Implicit premises
An implicit premise is a hidden or unstated assumption in an argument. It’s something the argument assumes to be true but doesn’t explicitly say. Without this premise, the argument might not make sense or wouldn’t logically lead to the conclusion.
Ad Hominem (fallacy)
Attack the person
“He’s not smart, ignore him”
Ad Populum (fallacy)
Popularity = truth
“Everyone believes it, so it’s true”
Force (fallacy)
Threats
“Agree or else!”
Pity (fallacy)
Emotional appeal
“Give me a break because I’m sad”
Consequences (fallacy)
Outcome determines truth
“It must be true; otherwise, bad things happen.”
Begging the Question (fallacy)
Assumes the conclusion in the premises
“I’m trustworthy because I tell the truth”
Demanding Unreasonable Justification (fallacy)
Requires impossible proof
“Prove climate change 100% or it’s false”
False Dichotomy (fallacy)
Only gives 2 options
“Either you’re with us, or against us”
