As human beings, we often find ourselves in arguments or discussions. But haven’t there been times where you wanted to win so badly, yet you couldn’t? Or lost a debate to someone who sounded convincing, even though deep down you knew they were wrong? 

While facts and figures are important, relying solely on them may not always guarantee a victory. There is another tool you can add to your arsenal: fallacy, or, in simple terms, a mistake in reasoning.

For centuries, philosophers have studied these common errors in thinking and given each of them a name. The tricky part is that fallacies often sound logical. At first, they can seem persuasive, but upon closer inspection, the cracks begin to emerge.

Sometimes, these mistakes are unintentional, simply because they are so common. Other times, they are deliberate, designed to persuade you or an audience without solid evidence. Either way, if you can spot and explain a fallacy, you hold the upper hand in any conversation.

Why it matters

Fallacies are everywhere: news headlines, political speeches, viral posts, and even casual conversations. Some may seem silly or harmless, but others can be deeply misleading and even dangerous.

The good news is that understanding fallacies helps you protect yourself from being misled. More importantly, it sharpens your reasoning and strengthens your arguments, making you not only more persuasive but also much harder to defeat.

Although there is no official count of how many types of fallacies exist, here are a few common ones to look out for:

Hasty generalisation

Let’s start with something we’re all familiar with: jumping to conclusions based on too little evidence.

Take this lighthearted example: you post in your university Facebook group asking for a teacher’s review. Two or three people quickly comment, ‘skip,’ ‘drop,’ or even ‘run.’ Based on such a tiny sample, you decided that the teacher must be avoided at any cost. That’s a classic case of hasty generalisation.

But beyond harmless situations, this fallacy can also fuel misleading and dangerous claims. Consider the phrase: “All Muslims are terrorists.” Islamophobes often use this sweeping generalisation to spread fear and hatred. It is a blatant lie, yet it continues to circulate.

Closer to home, mob justice in Bangladesh often results from the same mistake. Someone gets accused of a crime based solely on hearsay or rumor, without proper evidence. The result? Innocent people face violence or even death, all because of a hasty generalisation.

Argumentum ad populum (appeal to majority)

This fallacy happens when someone tries to justify an argument simply because “most people believe it.” But the truth of a statement does not depend on how many people support it.

For instance, if you study in a private university, you have definitely heard: “A public university is so much better than a private one.” And if you visit anywhere else, even your village, chances are you will hear the same sentiment. But this is just a majority belief, not a universal truth. The reality is, neither public nor private universities are automatically ‘better’. It depends on individual preferences, opportunities, and experiences.

It can also be dangerous. Take herbal medicine, for example. Many people believe herbal remedies are always better than traditional medicine because they’re ‘natural’. While herbal treatments can be effective in some cases, they cannot completely replace modern medical care. Following this majority belief blindly can put lives at risk.

Appeal to emotion

Picture this: you are on the way to class, half-asleep on a bus or in a car because you did not get a good night’s sleep. Just as you are about to nod off – thud! A loud bang wakes you. A street beggar is pounding on your window, saying: “If you fear God, donate to me” or “Give me money if you want to go to heaven.”

What’s happening here? Instead of directly saying, “I need money for food or medicine,” the beggar appeals to your religious feelings. Without offering a rational argument, they are trying to manipulate your emotions into giving.

But appeals to emotion are not always malicious. Sometimes, they are born out of desperation. For example, when Palestinians share pleas on social media, you may hear: “If you skip this video, Allah will know.” Technically, this is also an appeal to emotion. But in this case, it reflects the urgency of their situation, forcing them to use emotional appeals as their only means of survival.

Red Herring

You’re complaining to your parents about how hard school life is, and they pull this classic line: ‘Back in my day, we had to cross rivers, mountains, and jungles just to reach school.’ Sound familiar? Instead of addressing your complaint, they have shifted the topic to something irrelevant.

That’s the Red Herring fallacy, distraction from the real issue by dragging in unrelated points.

Let’s take a more serious example: the high number of sexual assault cases in Bangladesh. The causes include patriarchal norms, stigma, delays in investigation, and weak judicial processes. But instead of focusing on these systemic problems, many blame the victim: Why was she outside? What was she wearing?

These questions shift attention away from the root causes and onto the victim, leaving structural issues unaddressed. This results in a dangerous diversion that prevents accountability and real change.

As you can see, fallacies can appear at any moment in daily life. We are constantly surrounded by them, sometimes in harmless jokes, other times in serious debates or harmful misinformation. That is why it is worth keeping a few common fallacies in mind. You never know when the ability to spot one might come in handy.

The next time someone tries to outsmart you in an argument, don’t just listen – look for the fallacy. After all, the best way to win an argument is not with louder words, but with sharper reasoning.