vii. Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc
In other words, “there’s a correlation, therefore one causes the other”. It happens when a correlation exists between two variables that isn’t causation but it’s treated like such. For example, one variable happening after the other can lead to this fallacy.
Example: “Madara created Zetsu after starting to mind-control Yagura, therefore Yagure is the origin of Zetsu”
viii. Suppressed correlative
Occurs when someone distorts a correlative (two or more exclusive options) in a way that an alternative is deemed impossible.
Example: “Everything in the manga points out that Tobi=Obito”
Is pretty much the same as the Fallacy of the Four Terms, but is more incident in the conclusion rather than in the middle term.
Example: “Naruto was Sanji’s original name, so he was who kissed Sasuke”
x. Fallacy of composition
Occurs when someone assumes the properties of the particular as true for the universal.
Example: “The trademark hair color of the Uzumaki is red, therefore all redheads are Uzumaki”
xi. Fallacy of division
Occurs when someone assumes the properties of the universal as true for the particular. It happens a lot when someone takes a statistic and wrongly attributes values to the parts that constitute that statistic.
Example: “The Shinobi Alliance had 80 000 nins, therefore each village has 16 000 nins”
xii. False Dilemma
Occurs when someone says there’s only one alternative to a variable when there are more.
Example: “Tobi is either Madara or Obito”
xiii. If-by-whiskey fallacy
Occurs when someone uses doublespeak to appeal to both sides of the debate but doesn’t side with any of them.
Example: “Well, Tobi can be Obito because of the hair and the Sharingan, or it could be Madara’s clone because of mannerisms and knowledge, but let’s wait and see.”
xiv. Fallacy of the single cause
Occurs when someone assumes there’s a single causation to the events when there are many.
Example: Saying that everything breaks down to the Yin/Yang when there are many more causes in play.
xv. False attribution
Occurs when one fabricates or uses an irrelevant/invalid premise to support the conclusion.
Example: “Minato gave the second half othe Kyuubi to Sasuke because Itachi radiated good nature.”
Occurs when someone quotes things out of context, distorting the original meaning of said quote.
Example: Quoting Karin comparing the Kyuubi’s and Sasuke’s chakra to say Sasuke is a Jinchuuriki, although the comparison was only made about the evil of both chakras.
xvii. Argument to moderation
Occurs when someone says that a compromise between both sides of the argument is the best, even if they’re strikingly different in terms of validity.
Example: White Knights defending crappy theories
xviii. Historian’s fallacy
Occurs when someone has a hindsight bias, assuming that the information known at the present was known at a certain point in the past. This happens both in a storytelling point of view and the character’s point of view.
Example: Assuming the knowledge that Minato was (one of the) greatest shinobi of Konoha comes from Part I, when in reality Minato only was astronomically hyped in Part II.
xix. Incomplete/inconsistent comparison
Occurs when someone makes a comparison but it’s incomplete to be valid, either by lack of information or when the method of comparison is inconsistent.
Example: “Tobi and Obito are both Uchiha and have spiky hair, so they’re one and the same”
xx. Irrelevant conclusion
Occurs when someone reaches to a conclusion that does not address the argument being made at all.
Example: “Tobi is Obito because the author likes to lead the readers to wrong conclusions”
xxi. Kettle logic
It should be renamed KYF’s logic, really. Occurs when someone uses several inconsistent arguments to defend an argument.
xxii. Mind Projection Fallacy
Occurs when someone considers his/her perception of reality as reality itself.
Example: Actually believing in Phenomenological Reality.
xxiii. Raising the bar
Occurs when someone refutes an argument by demanding greater evidence. It’s specially fallacious when greater evidence is unnecessary or even inexistent.
xxiv. Nirvana fallacy
Occurs when someone refutes an argument by not being perfect, that is, doesn’t answer all the refuter’s doubts.
Example: “Tobi can’t be a clone of Madara because it doesn’t explain how Tobi isn’t Obito or Shisui.”
Occurs when someone treats an abstraction as a concrete entity when such treatment has no antecedent (abstractions like the Seven Sins have been personified throughout the centuries, so such treatment is no longer an reification IF it follows said personification’s basic characteristics)
Example: Treating Shinbutsu Shuugou/Bunri like jutsu. Shinbutsu Shuugou/Bunri, even if they were applied to concrete entities, they are abstractions themselves and there’s no antecedent of their personification.
xxvi. Retrospective determinism
Occurs when someone says that the occurrence of an event was inevitable beforehand since the event occurred, disregarding all the instances that could’ve modified the nature of the event.
Example: “Naruto is a Jinchuuriki because it was inevitable considering what happened in the Kyuubi incident.”
xxvii. Special pleading
Occurs when someone wants to say something is an exemption to a generally accepted rule without justifying (properly) the exemption.
Example: “Minato was a Senju but his clan name was hidden to protect him from harm, like they did to Naruto [but never justifying why other Senju, like Tsunade or Nawaki, didn’t receive such exemption].
xxviii. Strawman Argument
Occurs when someone twists the opponent’s argument or forms a counterpoint that doesn’t address the refutation at all. Here’s an example:
· “Tobi is Obito.”
· “The manga does not state that, so why do you say that?”
· “Well, it can’t be Madara or Shisui.”
xxix. Wrong Direction
Occurs when someone reverses the cause and effect of an event.
Example: “Naruto used Rasengan against Deva Realm because he won the fight.”