Logical Fallacies

In this video, you’ll learn about kinds of logical fallacies and how to spot them. Visit edu.gcfglobal.org/en/problem-... to learn even more. We hope you enjoy!

[@lydmonkey4593]

TO SUM IT UP: False cause (correlation-causation): identifies the cause of something incorrectly because they are correlated Straw man: Misrepresenting someone else's argument to make them seem better or worse Begging the question: Using part of the conclusion as reasoning False dichotomy: representing only two choices when there are more.

[@nicolebel2540]

thank you

[@masharatumbles7025]

Thanks

[@obitoeuchiwa436]

This makes my life so much easier thank you

[@romanmark8403]

I guess Im asking randomly but does anyone know a trick to get back into an instagram account? I was stupid forgot my password. I appreciate any tips you can give me

[@tomasscott7088]

@Roman Mark Instablaster ;)

[@julienwoodstock5546]

Learning about logical fallacies and seeing how everyone uses them but be able to critique yourself to come up with arguments That are based on rational and logic is something that should be taught at a very young age Im just now learning about logical fallacies and I’ve done my best to catch myself when using one of them it’s made me a much better critical thinker

[@raymonds.9021]

I started to learn about logical fallacies after I dropped out of college. A popular atheist named Matt Dillahunty is the person who I mostly credit for teaching me to use spot them in Christian arguments for God via YT videos. I agree though they should be emphasized at a much younger age. It teaches one how to think.

[@russellcampbell3639]

Excellent point. It is one thing to fool someone else, it is much more dangerous to fool oneself.

[@julienwoodstock5546]

@@russellcampbell3639 exactly its too bad school dont teach kids how to. Think critically

[@russellcampbell3639]

@@julienwoodstock5546 It is intentional. It is hard to convince a people they need a new form of governance when they literally govern themselves. To pull a trick like that, you need an ignorant populace. Hence the modern public school system.

[@ElGuapo96]

Jokes on you, I have portrayed myself as the based chad and you as the crying, seething soy wojak. Therefore your logical arguments are invalid

[@Lexi-te5mq]

This guy: explaining this in a very simple way to understand My teacher: PoSt HoC eRgO PrOpTeR hOc

[@NYCBG]

@Maximilian Gordon WOW! It worked for me too!

[@bero3356]

@@NYCBG wow it didn’t work for me gave me a virus thank God I’m using a virtual machine

[@nanamei1456]

same

[@gaijingojira3601]

Mfw I pronounced that wrong and summoned a demon

[@CC-2020]

@@bero3356 lol

[@jademarin9197]

I love this video so much. Very straight forward, has great visuals and enticing voice. Really helped me out with my homework tonight. No I’m not a bot I’m just super faded rn and trying to get my point across but I still feel smart form this video. Anywayssss have a happy day!

[@Lughnerson]

Imagine how the world would come to a standstill if politicians and media messiahs were required to speak logically, and use objective facts.

[@dummytest4186]

No more Trump

[@tdgree7593]

Sorry to break it to you my friend but that's never going to happen!! ..........ever, unfortunately 😕 Imagine indeed.

[@Fifasher2K]

​@@tdgree7593 Use imagination.

[@calista910]

This was great! I hate looking at boring powerpoints, I hope you make more videos like these for English clases, 'cause i'm subbin'

[@GCFLearnFree]

That's the plan!

[@Safwan.Hossain]

Good video. Logical fallacies are the most common tactic used in online sports debates

[@ushiki2212]

I like your profile pic 🇨🇦🍿👍🏾.

[@erica863]

No experience with sports debates, but I’ve definitely experienced them a ton in online debates in general.

[@timer9924]

@@erica863 In my own (anecdotal) and subjective experience, I personally notice that Ad Hominem is almost everywhere in unstructured online debates, often with an argument with it. Most online debates I notice burden of proof fallacy, where claim-makers say “Can you prove me wrong?” without any evidence. On KZbin, the black and white fallacy is EVERYWHERE.

[@spreadkindnessyall]

@@erica863 ikr, mfs think they're some sort of lawyer

[@williampennjr.4448]

Politicians and the mass media have made it an art form.

[@n40798]

Something that sometimes happens to me is that when someone cooks something that looks and/or smells good, I say "That looks good", or "That smells good", but the one who cooked it replies almost as if correcting me saying "It IS good". As if I was saying that it only smells or looks good but probably doesn't taste good. That always annoys me and I can't understand how someone's logic can be so twisted to assume that I'm saying it doesn't taste good just because I say it looks/smells good. Can someone give me some insight on this? or if you respond like this, please explain!

[@Warformers]

I’m not expert in logic fallacies, But I have become quite interested in them that I’ve tried to pick pocket them and see how it’s actually used quite frequently in everyday life. If anything it probably is a straw man, because they take away what you didn’t mention and present it against you to make it seem like you dont know what you’re saying. Remember, I’m no expert in these but I’m trying my best to recognize them and try to point them out and educate people

[@thunderstorm9541]

i think you may have just used a logical fallacy there; you're assuming the person means to correct you, when they may instead be confirming what you say. it's a habit people can have.

[@Warformers]

thunder storm hmmmm you’re onto something, damn logic fallacies are so hard

[@russellmillar7132]

Couples counseling might help.

[@lionberryofskyclan]

I think they are just confirming your thoughts, rather than correcting. It’s not meant to come off as rude, though.

[@erica863]

I am forever grateful for my 12th grade English & philosophy (I know, I’ve since heard it’s totally weird be to taught philosophy in high school let alone a Catholic high school) for teaching us about logical fallacies!!’

[@josephfox9221]

Actually rhetoric is a big part of theology. All theology is is basically using rhetoric and philosophy to justify the existence of God.

[@datboi42]

@@josephfox9221 not necessarily I would say

[@unconscious031]

Thanks for explaining it very easy to understand 🥰 Keep up the good work 💕

[@GCFLearnFree]

Glad it was helpful!

[@kurokishi5532]

Watching this makes me question myself Am i just lazy but keep making excuses to get my way outa problem? Do i assume things wrong then say that it is wrong?

[@melissaball2773]

Very good video...

[@DeconvertedMan]

Only 100 or more to learn.

[@spiritbx1337]

Seems like a few semesters worth on content that could be taught in high-school...

[@DeconvertedMan]

@@spiritbx1337 oh an overhaul of the full education system should be in order :D XD

[@LightInTheDarknessProductions]

@@spiritbx1337 Yeah, countries with an efficient education system. Some countries don't have that though.

[@oscarbaez2098]

Very interesting to see thank you.

[@NickSellsMonmouth]

I agree

[@cloroxbleach8676]

N

[@tinttiakka2028]

@@cloroxbleach8676 I

[@thebloodgroupmates6181]

superb editing and explanation! thank you

[@GCFLearnFree]

Glad it helped!

[@carealoo744]

2:50 I like how the video doesn't entertain the idea that Ethan is home and just doesn't want to talk to her, because that's too sad a thought.

[@rationalmango]

Great introduction to some of the most common logical fallacies.

[@GCFLearnFree]

Thank you kindly!

[@uzi2quixk53]

You have this for general forensics? For online school 💀

[@Rowganlife]

great introduction!

[@cjpapasito]

Great video, all in all. But right at the end, you create a false dichotomy yourself when you ask us to choose between “rhetoric” and “logic”. Reasoning and logic are aspects of rhetoric, along with all the other appeals and fallacies we use. Using logic and reasoning well are powerful rhetorical tools, but they are just one of the ways we engage in dialogue with each other in the hopes of changing each other’s minds and gaining assent through debate/discussion.

[@paulmercury6571]

I believe that in most cases it isn't the desire to change someone's mind but the desire to for self gratification. What you expect to gain from a discussion is relevant to the person you are discussing with.

[@mwapemwelwa3234]

brilliant

[@goldenwarrior1186]

You passed the test

[@djones02]

The worst is the fallacy fallacy. Just because something is poorly argued doesn't mean it is wrong. The point being, if you are correct but your logic isn't 100% sound, you need to improve your argument. Sometimes you just need more evidence because you can't be absolutely definitive. Sometimes that is good enough. The slippery slope is a good example. Just because you have drawn a trend line based on past results doesn't necessarily mean that future events will continue to follow the trend. However if you completely ignore trend lines you are also a fool. If your trend line is made of 2 points its a bad example, if it is 5 or 100 you might want to pay closer attention.

[@MYfriendsknow]

Wonderful !!! Thank you - I plan to use for Homeschool

[@GCFLearnFree]

You are so welcome!

[@reyzaldenguillermo6005]

For me the fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or wrong number choices in the construction of an argument.

[@Ivan-td7kb]

Logical fallacies are often used to shutdown legitimate concerns. There’s definitely a bias towards being open to possibilities over being cautious.

[@user-pu4nw7jx5l]

Very beautifully explained

[@GCFLearnFree]

Thank you so much 🙂

[@quester6801]

Where can one proactively practice spotting falacies?

[@alex2005z]

Find a political debate, slow it down, then write down the fallacies

[@chad7064]

I was in a relationship with someone that always used the false dichotomy on me … if they texted me or called and I didn’t answer it meant I was cheating on them…. They never thought about I was at work or if I was sleeping when it was 3am.

[@Magalyjackie27]

thanks !!! this video helped alot

[@GCFLearnFree]

You're welcome!

[@danri4244]

Had to watch this for PHIL 2050 at UVU. It was an alright video.

[@rigger41]

The animation on false dichotomy was perfect

[@GCFLearnFree]

Thank you!

[@checkmateopponent415]

In which subject other comes

[@jackbinkerd8413]

It’s so hard to find this stuff in a daily debate

[@gabsanime4842]

Thank you I learned about fallacy

[@GCFLearnFree]

Glad it was helpful!

[@christinalagas9361]

the background music is immaculate

[@waspwrap1235]

If it when’s the base then why would I not want to use them

[@HABIBIfromDubia]

which app did you use for editing?/

[@GCFLearnFree]

Adobe After Effects

[@CosmicVenzen]

wow i understand easily

[@sabarca714]

Dope video. 👠🕊️

[@GCFLearnFree]

Thanks 💯

[@Engycation]

Very Nice Video Go A Head

[@GCFLearnFree]

Many many thanks. We will!

[@jhonparker7395]

Wish I could just have all logical fallacies be highlighted right away when I'm browsing the web

[@NitroxNcrocz]

thats cool and all but has anyone actually found the Square Root of Boo? seems pretty important..... could the equation be Boo x Pi = Scream? These are the burning questions that keep me up at night.

[@maxyt1733]

i am a straw man when it comes to arguing with siblings lol

[@poisedperson6475]

I am a strawman when it comes to protect my crops

[@2liter8]

Nice I like it

[@GCFLearnFree]

Glad you like it!

[@CosmicVenzen]

now i will be a topper if its about logical fallacies

[@shrikantbmali]

This should be tough in schools

[@antoinettemulenga]

Can you make one about genetic

[@CipherKilledit]

Tight! Killed it!

[@Bittywhite]

Used for WJU, Rocklin CA

[@wolfhanzo]

This should be used as an example for why the campaigning process is dishonest throughout

[@TheSoftballstar1261]

2:45 EVERY-MOTHER-OUT-THERE

[@Redpoppy80]

I learned how important fallacies are from 2 years of watching FOX NEWS

[@brendan8160]

@tlessmo Is the fact that some fallacies can be subtle and hard to recognize by many actually a sign that more should learn about them? And because it's rare and unfamiliar to many, does that suddenly render that fallacy to no longer be illogical?

[@paulmercury6571]

If it took you 2 years to learn the importance of logical fallacies by watching Fox News then it is apparent that you're a slow learner. I learnt it in a couple hours after watching CNN.

[@chrismaxx8528]

@@paulmercury6571 haha! ❤️

[@poisedperson6475]

@@paulmercury6571 you can easily spot them in minutes by watching both channels. Get off the high horses, people.

[@paulmercury6571]

@@poisedperson6475 I haven't said that Fox is a beacon of truth. I just used other words to say what you have said. 🙏

[@KarenGarcia-wl4dm]

my school made me watch this.

[@spiritbx1337]

Critical thinking should be taught in school, it should be a whole class in and of itself. It's so important and directly affects what you will believe in and how you will affect the world.

[@kopite4434]

Ethan is NOT taking a shower! 🤣🤣🤣

[@Rico-Suave_]

Watched all of it

[@paulmercury6571]

In truth almost everything we say is a logical fallacy of one description or another.

[@paulmercury6571]

@BluckKraken I Exactly!

[@paulmercury6571]

@BluckKraken I Everything is founded on our beliefs . I think therefore I am. What I'm really getting at is that a logical fallacy is just a means to undermine someone else's argumentative position. You may undermine their position by stating that they have produced a logical fallacy but you have not necessarily deconstructed their position and proved them wrong , the fallacy fallacy deals with this. ☺

[@paulmercury6571]

@BluckKraken I 15) The Fallacy Fallacy Here's something vital to keep in mind when sniffing out fallacies: just because someone's argument relies on a fallacy doesn't necessarily mean that their claim is inherently untrue. Making a fallacy-riddled claim doesn't automatically invalidate the premise of the argument -- it just means the argument doesn't actually validate their premise. In other words, their argument sucks, but they aren't necessarily wrong.

[@paulmercury6571]

@BluckKraken I In order for a logical fallacy to exist a statement must be contestable , yes? Everything is contestable!

[@paulmercury6571]

@BluckKraken I It is sufficient.

[@innocentmanyiwa7282]

Interesting

[@craigs3056]

Clearly there's at least 15 people that hate losing arguments

[@edreeszy]

Sounds like a presidency

[@tmo314]

0:11 me debating literally anyone

[@summernight7587]

Basically what narcissist do

[@highskies7588]

I need questions based on this video, if someone will help I will too grateful. I need them for school project, pls help!

[@YogeshSharma-nv1dp]

Why always be a logical

[@indiansrk9997]

to not harm anyone innocent and get best decisions

[@alex2005z]

You dont need to always be logical, but for important decisions its better

[@dannovak3886]

Maybe Ethan just didn't feel like answering the door bell

[@shoxerx7406]

20 seconds in, already know what it means

[@faustineriffaud8631]

good

[@GCFLearnFree]

Thanks

[@josephfox9221]

I feel like the begging the question one wasn't really a solid example. He wasn't using circular logic he was using witness evidence for its justification. A better one would be ghosts exist because if they didn't exist we wouldn't have a word for them. (This too isn't a very good example)

[@braedondavies9592]

"The dinosaurs ate vegetables." Technically, isn't this a Fallacy of composition or a Hasty Generalization?

[@GCFLearnFree]

Hi there! Unfortunately, we are not experts on dinosaurs! ;)

[@skellingtonmeteoryballoon]

I do love vegetables.

[@round5soundsfetchmetheirso827]

Logical Fallacy, or the way Ben Shapiro wins debates.

[@josephhaynes4526]

That's why he's beaten every democratic counterpart in a debate

[@peacebestillconversations3761]

in my experience neither side is balanced. republicans argue with pure logos and technicalities without regard for the ethos and pathos, while democrats argue with ethos and pathos without regard for logos

[@foxmolder363]

This is an example of False Cause.

[@judahwhiddon4245]

Jesus Mendoza nah this is how he does it, he’s just sneaky about it

[@christhomas3720]

@@josephhaynes4526 Not only untrue (Andrew Neil destroyed him) but since the majority of those he argues with are young kids without training in logic or debate, it is little wonder that he does indeed those debates.

[@jawshvancouver2754]

Prager U should watch this

[@icew0lf98]

ghosts exist because I saw one in the closet is valid, if it's true that he saw a ghost in the closet

[@sharismad]

Yes it is, but you can’t know if he’s truthful or lying. There’s no evidence except his sight to back it up.

[@lionberryofskyclan]

Sure, but there is zero evidence to back up his claim, therefore the argument is invalid.

[@nag0074]

Anecdotal evidence

[@thomfrostted]

Dinos ate vegetables?😂

[@xyckriz]

2:04 on begging the question, regarding the demonstration. why did you say he "assumed" that ghost exists? if he already saw it with his own eyes, isn't it part of his personal knowledge? knowledge that passed through one's senses is valid. so why still consider it as an assumption? it may not be an objective fact, but it can still be considered a fact since he has personal knowledge of it. hence, it is no longer an assumption. so, the word "assumption" in the video is inaccurate. now proving such fact to others is different because it requires arguments that would support his claim. if he uses his personal knowledge to come up with a conclusion as to why his fact should be accepted as objective knowledge, now that falls on the logical fallacy of begging the question.

[@reyanthonyjardiolin8875]

Engine Cadet Jardiolin I think fallacy falls to applied existence. We say That something"exist" based upon what we perceive with senses. You should say then that everything we call real it's actually assume as such and not shown with evidence and reasoning. In the world labelling things as real by a fallacy or rather to fallacies since there's the beginning and Question one and the consensus one.

[@chococookie2181]

Wait but how can we properly prove that ghosts exist? What evidence should we give?

[@CrewDrastically]

N O T H I N G

[@alex2005z]

Find one and catch it

[@johnjoelbulatao2605]

is love a fallacy?

[@alex2005z]

Yes. Appeal to emotion

[@AndrewVelonis]

I'm not sure I accept your explanation of begging the question. Begging the question is a way of not answering a question. Consider the original version of "why did the chicken cross the road?" We can assume that the intent was to get to the other side, but if we use that as the answer, we have not identified the motive.

[@paulmercury6571]

That (your example) is a 'straw man' and not an example of circular reasoning.

[@yourboislime]

He never explains the example of the strawman on why it is a strawman logical fallacy, can anybody give me a good example?

[@michaelroditis1952]

Person A: The children's winter concert at the school should include non-Christmas songs too. Person B: You won't be happy until Christmas songs are banned from being played on the radio! This example of a straw man argument is related to slippery slope reasoning

[@drewcavalier744]

Honest question... Wouldn't ANYONE WANT to be informed, logical and appear intelligent?

[@withlovestephaniedenise7024]

What's a logical fallacy for Covid vaccines?

[@alex2005z]

Logical fallacies exist in arguments, not in objects. You can have logical fallacies in arguments about a certain theme, but just saying "whats a logical fallacy in covid vacines" doesnt make much sense.

[@theangusschmaloer]

You just explains politics xdxd

[@themasculinismmovement]

OMG he's right the dinosaurs did eat vegetables! I'm never eating a vegetable again. Wait, some dinosaurs also ate meat! I'm never eating meat again!

[@riotraverv4518]

Of all the fallacies, there is only one as annoying and corrupt as any other, the reverse repetition fallacy

[@BrownGirlsThink]

The ghost one lost me.

[@mkinder20]

This is what KZbin TikTok etc. should be posting every day not garbage I feel like people would be better off with using logic and reason other than emotions

[@halseykale9930]

Wait a moment.. about the Begging the Question one... so if I say that I saw something (or heard, or smelled, or touched, whatever), this is not enough to say that it exists? Fair enough. I could be hallucinating. BUT what about all the rest? What makes something "real"? What if ANYONE is hallucinating? Recognizing this fallacy doesn't really help us refraining from this possibility. It doesn't help us separating hallucination from reality, but what does really? Example: let's say I did see a ghost and I'm sure it was a ghost. How could I prove its existence? If I just saw it, say, for a moment while I was passing by a shop and saw it inside the shop from the outside, and then it was gone... what other way do I have to say it, if not a fallacious one? I think this fallacy fails to be applied to existence. We say that something "exists" based upon what we perceive with senses. You should say, then, that everything we call "real" it's actually assumed as such, and not shown with evidence and reasoning. What is evidence, at all? Is it whatever has the most consensus upon? Then we're going straight into another fallacy, the consensus fallacy. In this case: "If the majority (or unanimity) of people say x exists, then it exists" , which happens to be the real-life actual worldwide case. Is the world labelling things as "real" by a fallacy? Or rather, two fallacies since there's the Begging the Question one and the Consensus one? One has to fallaciously speculate the existence of something to proceed and find proofs of it. Why would anyone go and find evidence about the existence of something if they don't even suspect it to exists? Is our perception of reality programmed to be - at least initially - fallacious in its nature? Are our brains somehow hardwired to fallacy?

[@spiritbx1337]

It's called science, science seeks to find the truth to the highest possible degree of certainty (since, like you said, we could be a brain in a jar and just imagining everything somehow). In the pursuit of such truth, science uses evidence to add credibility to it's claims. The more evidence, the more credible the claim is. If you can't prove that you saw a ghost, how do you know what you saw WAS a ghost? Isn't it crazy to think that what you saw was a ghost when we have no actual evidence that ghosts even exist? In science, scientists use 'theories' to explain certain things, a theory in science isn't just an idea or a hunch, it's the entire compilation of evidence proving the thing and explaining various details using other evidence, if one day some of the evidence is shown to be wrong, the theory will change to adapt to the new finding, and the search for the truth will go on. That's the beauty of science, it's not discriminatory, if someone can give genuine evidence that ghosts exist, then that will be evidence that ghosts exist, but never forget, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, you will need to provide evidence that passes all scrutiny before it would get accepted. That's why you can't start an argument in favor of you seeing a ghost, for you to have seen a ghost, ghosts have to be real in the first place, assuming that they are real without the evidence that they are means that you have a false premise, to properly prove you saw a ghost, you don't ask "Did I see a ghost" You ask "What was it that I saw?" and you work your way up from there.

[@marieindia8116]

@@spiritbx1337 science CAN be discriminatory. After all, scientists are also only human, subject to strong biases, personal and trained. They are not immune to fallacy either.

[@woogie872]

I'm tired of the wrong people in charge especially after people paid them ridiculous amounts money.

[@markr.devereux3385]

I even had a debate on the concept of logic the guy says I have super logic. S.o.b. logic is logic just use a little logic please if we continue to have a discussion. About 5 min went by and he couldnt help using some fallacy in every statement. Finally we stopped suddenly. I remarked you just made a logical remark a lightbulb went off in his head. Some people

[@dejankovacevic2854]

👣🙂

[@-oheavios5847]

ok

[@williampennjr.4448]

While all ad hominem attacks are logical fallacies, not all insults are ad hominem attacks. If I point out with evidence someone's lack of credibility, I'm not suggesting they are wrong on every point they make, but it does show that they can't be taken on their word about the evidence they present. A lot of political debate comes down to credibility, which is why hypocrisy and duplicity are logical fallacies as well,

[@alex2005z]

Even if they lack credibility, that doesnt make their argument any weaker. It only shows you cannot trust the person

[@williampennjr.4448]

@@alex2005z It also means you cant trust the argument if its based on unreliable statements.

[@alex2005z]

@williampennjr.4448 there is no such thing as an unreliable statement. When you state a fact its either correct or incorrect.

[@williampennjr.4448]

@@alex2005z How do you know if every statement someone makes correct or incorrect?

[@alex2005z]

@@williampennjr.4448 you look up the evidence

[@irongodzilla1635]

After watching this video, I had learned a lot about how all of the commenters here are part-time furries

[@mickeylara2111]

Ghost exist because he saw a ghost is not possible because ghost are supernatural and beyond our senses.

[@spiritbx1337]

That's what I don't get, if things are beyond our sense we couldn't know of them, and if they aren't then we can test it. There's not really a middle ground that isn't rife with excuses.

[@TruthSpeaker.]

Wrong. That's a logical fallacy on your part. Just because a soul left a body doesn't mean it has to be "beyond our senses. " I have had my own experiences which have persuaded me of the paranormal.

[@alex2005z]

​@@spiritbx1337we have tests to find electrons and other particles we cant sense. And we do so based on the impact they have on their surroundings.

[@noaprendaisingles6861]

"I cannot comment on this issue because I don't form part of a certain group." Help me name this fallacy, please.

[@frepar]

Watch CNN, MSNBC etc and you will see examples

[@semasityByMF171]

As a person who's in Gen Z and has liberal political views, I Am ashamed of my generation as the woke left uses logical fallacies just to enforce their ideology to the youth. Like "Not donating to LGBT Charities makes you a bigot" is an example of a logical fallacy. Which violates the golden rule of logic "Correlation does not equal Causation". They are many conservatives out there that doesn't support the LGBTQ+ But they are not Nazis. Just someone doesn't support LGBT Because of their ideology, religion or they never heard it doesn't make them a Nazi. Because half of the world is conservative doesn't make them a Nazi.

[@whiskerAndPetal]

then no argument can be perfect. If I say Hitler is dictator then there must be some type of fallacy which can prove my statement wrong.

[@GCFLearnFree]

Hi there! It's not the case. A logical fallacy uses false cause as an argument. A false cause is when someone incorrectly identifies the cause of something.

[@alex2005z]

"Hitler is a dictator" isnt an argument, therefore it cannot contain logical fallacies. You arent drawing anything from the fact. Its simply a factual statement (correct or incorrect)

[@thestoneymormon4203]

My favorite Birds Aren’t Real!

[@davidaustin6962]

that was a badly explained example for begging the question (aka begging the claim). The problem with George saying "Ghosts exist because I saw one" is not that he presumed ghosts exist. That's not what begging the question is ... most claims start out with a hypothesis and doing so doesn't make it a begging the claim fallacy. The problem with George's claim was that it shifts the question to the accuracy of his sight, which has not been established. This is circular in that he presumed his vision was infallible (the claim), but it was not so you're back where you started.

[@juicycosmetics]

Are you a good person? Let’s look at some of the Ten Commandments to see! Have you ever stolen? (Even if it’s something really small or not worth much) Have you ever lied? Or have you ever looked with lust? Now, have you ever taken the Lords name in vain? If you’ve ever done any of those things, you would be either a liar, a thief, an adulterer,(for looking with lust), or a blasphemer(for taking Gods name in vain) or maybe even all of them. Therefore we have all sinned against God and therefore deserve death.(Romans 3:23 & 6:23)That’s why ~2000 years ago a Savior was sent, Jesus Christ to die for the sins of the world and then rose 3 days later. Through His sacrifice He paid the fine for our sins, and now we can be made new by accepting His free gift of Salvation. In order to accept this free gift, we must first repent. This is a change of mind about sin (from an embrace of sin to rejection of sin) and a turning to God. Once you repent, you can then turn to FAITH in the Savior. A person who has truly repented of their sin and exercised faith in Christ will give evidence of a changed life. Therefore, as a result of Salvation you’ll then produce good works and the fruit of Salvation. You aren’t saved by doing good works. But you can then produce good works once you are saved.

[@Beyond_Belief534]

The argument is invalid because you're begging the question about cartoon dinosaurs existing