Қателіктердің байланысты шатасуы

Informal inductive fallacy
the informal fallacy that applies a rule beyond its scope
The association fallacy is a formal logical fallacy that asserts that properties of one thing must also be properties of another thing, if both things belong to the same group. For example, a fallacious arguer may claim that "bears are animals, and bears are dangerous; therefore your dog, which is also an animal, must be dangerous." When it is an attempt to win favor by exploiting the audience's preexisting spite or disdain for something else, it is called guilt by association or an appeal to spite (Latin: argumentum ad odium). Guilt by association is similar to ad hominem arguments which attack the speaker rather than addressing the claims, but in this case the ill feeling is not created by the argument; it already exists.

A form of the association fallacy often used by those denying a well established scientific or historical proposition is the so called Galileo gambit. (also known as the Galileo fallacy) The argument runs thus: Galileo was ridiculed in his time for his scientific observations, but was later acknowledged to be right; the proponent argues that since their non mainstream views are provoking ridicule and rejection from other scientists, they will later be recognized as correct, like Galileo. The gambit is flawed in that being ridiculed does not necessarily correlate with being right and that many people who have been ridiculed in history were, in fact, wrong. Similarly, Carl Sagan has stated that people laughed at geniuses such as Christopher Columbus and the Wright brothers, but "they also laughed at Bozo the Clown". It is often committed by those whose theories reject common scientific consensus. An example of this is: "Alex is being ridiculed due to his (false) claim of vaccines to cause health problems, therefore he is correct".