The Problem With Learning Logical Fallacies

"Most logical fallacies are informal fallacies. This means that whether or not they are fallacies depends on the context. For example, it's a fallacy called ad hominem when someone attacks the person who made a claim instead of addressing their claim. But that doesn't mean every criticism of a person is a fallacy. If someone claims that they're trustworthy, bringing up past examples of their dishonesty is relevant and not a fallacy in this context."

Logical fallacies are mistakes in arguments, such as appealing to “natural” as proof, presenting false dilemmas, or misrepresenting an opponent’s position as a straw man. Recognizing fallacies can help protect against manipulation and keep conversations focused. However, superficial knowledge can backfire by weakening clear communication and claim evaluation. Over-identifying fallacies can happen when “fallacy-shaped” statements are treated as fallacies without checking context. Many informal fallacies depend on surrounding details. For example, ad hominem is fallacious when personal attacks replace engagement with the claim, but relevant criticism of credibility can be appropriate. Flawed arguments can still produce true conclusions.

Read at Psychology Today