Formal fallacies occur when there is a problem with the form, or structure, of the argument.

This particular formal fallacy is known as denying the antecedent.

An argument that contains a formal fallacy will always be invalid.

A formal fallacy is a pattern of reasoning that is always wrong.

As modus ponens, the following argument contains no formal fallacies.

By contrast, an argument with a formal fallacy could still contain all true premises:

An error that stems from a poor logical form is sometimes called a formal fallacy or simply an invalid argument.

The 'naturalistic fallacy' is often claimed to be a formal fallacy.

The presence of a formal fallacy in a deductive argument does not imply anything about the argument's premises or its conclusion.

Though, 1 and 2 are true statements, 3 does not follow because the argument commits the formal fallacy of affirming the consequent.

In contrast to a formal fallacy of deduction, the error is not merely a flaw in logic.

Bad reasoning within arguments can be because it commits either a formal fallacy or an informal fallacy.

Syllogistic fallacies are formal fallacies that occur in syllogisms.

The existential fallacy, or existential instantiation, is a formal fallacy.

Because it applies to the argument's form, as opposed to the argument's content, it is classified as a formal fallacy.

(See also, formal fallacy and informal fallacy).

The moralistic fallacy is the formal fallacy of assuming that what is desirable is found or inherent in nature.

The conjunction fallacy is a formal fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that specific conditions are more probable than a single general one.

An argument could contain both an informal fallacy and a formal fallacy yet have a correct conclusion, for example, again affirming the consequent:

Formal fallacies of deductive reasoning fail to follow the rules of logic that guarantee a true conclusion follows given the truth of the premises.

Completely dismissing an argument based on any of the above violations of ethos is a formal fallacy, rendering the dismissal of the argument invalid.

Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false.

In philosophy, the term logical fallacy properly refers to a formal fallacy: a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid.

Affirming the consequent, sometimes called converse error or fallacy of the converse, is a formal fallacy of inferring the converse from the original statement.

Wes Boyer and Samuel Stoddard have written a humorous essay teaching students how to be persuasive by means of a whole host of informal and formal fallacies.

This is actually the standard example for a logical fallacy.

If we're going to get into logical fallacies, who are these "many people"?

It is a type of logical fallacy: a bad argument that makes no sense.

Which is nothing but a very obvious logical fallacy, and not worth arguing against.

What is wrong with you, embracing logical fallacies to avoid taking responsibility for your behavior?

The logical fallacy is believing that this time their arguments will win the day.

I know R402 did a marvellous job of destroying some logical fallacies under the line.

There is a list of fallacies on the logical fallacy page.

In this setting, their usage can usually be classified as a logical fallacy.

A common approach to studying informal logic is to start with logical fallacies.

It is a logical fallacy because Person A never made that claim.

If the two possibilities in question are mutually exclusive, this is not a logical fallacy.

Special pleading also often resembles the "appeal to" logical fallacies.

The following example demonstrates why this is a logical fallacy:

"But surely that involves the logical fallacy of proving too much?

This guy is simply full of logical fallacies.

There is, as you may have noticed, a certain level of logical fallacies that denialists fall to.

Surely in his training, he encountered the following logical fallacy: Some dogs have spots.

In this case, the speaker commits the logical fallacy of begging the question.

This is distinct from a logical fallacy, which indicates an error in reasoning.

An argument that is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.

This is a logical fallacy because there are at least five possibilities:

Both of these reasons are based on logical fallacies and neither is admissible under the Convention.

Cherry picking can be found in many logical fallacies.

Mental accounting is subject to many logical fallacies and cognitive biases.