# Topic: Relevance

Arguments whose premises do not genuinely support the conclusion: they appeal to sources, popularity, tradition, association, or similar cases, attack the person instead of the claim, or silently presuppose what they claim to prove.

| Fallacy | Trigger – look for … |
| ------- | -------------------- |
| **[Fallacy-fallacy](/check/relevance/fallacy-fallacy.md)** |  An *invalid or refuted argument* for a claim is used as evidence that the *claim itself is false* (conflating bad reasoning with a false conclusion). |
| **[Appeal to authority](/check/relevance/authority/index.md)** |  A claim is supported or rejected mainly because of the source’s status or expertise, rather than the evidence itself. |
| **[Appeal to a false authority](/check/relevance/authority/false_authority/index.md)** |  The cited source is not a valid authority for the claim: no relevant expertise, anonymous/unverifiable, misquoted, fabricated, or from a field where the claim is contested. |
| **[Appeal to tradition](/check/relevance/authority/false_authority/appeal_to_tradition.md)** |  A practice or belief defended primarily because it is *old, customary, or "the way things have always been done"* – duration used as proof of correctness. |
| **[Bandwagon fallacy](/check/relevance/authority/false_authority/bandwagon_fallacy.md)** |  A position supported or rejected primarily because *many people* hold it, do it, or find it popular – majority size used as evidence of truth. |
| **[Honour by association](/check/relevance/authority/false_authority/honour_by_association.md)** |  Credibility or acceptance granted *solely* through positive association with a respected person, brand, or institution – no independent evaluation of the thing itself. |
| **[False analogy](/check/relevance/false_analogy.md)** |  A property of one thing is transferred to another based on their *similarity in other respects*, without establishing that this specific property follows from those shared features. |
| **[Petitio principii](/check/relevance/petitio_principii.md)** |  A premise silently assumes the conclusion, often by restating it in different words, changing scope, or relying on an unexamined assumption that is itself in dispute. |
| **[Appeal to consequences](/check/relevance/appeal_to_consequences.md)** | A *factual claim* is argued to be true or false from the *consequences* it would have if it were true or false ("if X is true, bad things follow – so X is false"; "if X were false, good things would follow – so X is true"). |
| **[Wishful thinking](/check/relevance/wishful_thinking/index.md)** | Accepting a claim as true, or treating weak evidence as decisive, simply because truth of the claim is *desirable*. |
| **[Arrival fallacy](/check/relevance/wishful_thinking/arrival_fallacy.md)** | A *current problem* is dismissed or deferred based on an *expected future event* that has little factual basis for resolving it. Special form of "wishful thinking". |

#END.