How many kinds of fallacies are there in Logic?

Question

i mean a fixed number and would you give a list?

Answer 1

That's like asking how many dishes are there in culinary cuisine. Humans will never die (assumed), therefore logic will never die, therefore we will never find the final logical fallacy until people stop using false logic.

According to wikipedia's list of logical fallacies there are 31 formal fallacies, 34 informal fallacies, 11 faulty generalizations, and 23 red herring fallacies. So in total there are 99 fallacies according to common consensus from the good folks at wikipedia. I hope you read all of this because I took the time to look it up, copy and paste, reformat and delete the pesky "[edit}s" strewn throughout.

Formal Fallacies

Formal fallacies are arguments that are fallacious due to an error in their form or technical structure. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs.

Appeal to probability: because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen. This is the premise on which Murphy's Law is based.

Argument from fallacy: if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion must necessarily be false.

Bare assertion fallacy: premise in an argument is assumed to be true purely because it says that it is true.

Base rate fallacy: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.

Conjunction fallacy: assumption that specific conditions are more probable than a single general one.

Correlative based fallacies

Denying the correlative: where attempts are made at introducing alternatives where there are none

Suppressed correlative: where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible

Fallacy of necessity: a degree of unwarranted necessity is placed in the conclusion based on the necessity of one or more of its premises

False dilemma (false dichotomy): where two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are several

If-by-whiskey: An answer that takes side of the questioner's suggestive question

Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion or irrelevant thesis)

Homunculus fallacy: where a "middle-man" is used for explanation, this usually leads to regressive middle-man explanations without actually explaining the real nature of a function or a process

Masked man fallacy: the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one

Naturalistic fallacy: a fallacy that claims that if something is natural, then it is "good" or "right"

Nirvana fallacy: when solutions to problems are said not to be right because they are not perfect

Negative Proof fallacy: that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false

Package-deal fallacy: when two or more things have been linked together by tradition or culture are said to stay that way forever

Propositional fallacies (Formal):

Affirming a disjunct: concluded that one logical disjunction must be false because the other disjunct is true.

Affirming the consequent: the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true. Has the form if A, then B; B, therefore A

Denying the antecedent: the consequent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be false because the antecedent is false; if A, then B; not A, therefore not B

Quantificational fallacies (Formal):

Existential fallacy: an argument has two universal premises and a particular conclusion, but the premises do not establish the truth of the conclusion

Illicit conversion: the invalid conclusion that because a statement is true, the inverse must be as well

Proof by example: where things are proved by giving an example

Formal syllogistic fallacies

Syllogistic fallacies are logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms.

Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise

Fallacy of exclusive premises: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative

Fallacy of four terms: a categorical syllogism has four terms

Illicit major: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion

Illicit minor: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its minor term is undistributed in the minor premise but distributed in the conclusion.

Fallacy of the undistributed middle: the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed

Categorical syllogism: an argument with a positive conclusion, but one or two negative premises :

Informal fallacies

Informal fallacies are arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural ("formal") flaws.

Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam)

Appeal to ridicule: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous

Argument from ignorance ("appeal to ignorance"): The fallacy of assuming that something is true/false because it has not been proven false/true. For example: "The student has failed to prove that he didn't cheat on the test, therefore he must have cheated on the test."

Begging the question ("petitio principii"): where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises

Burden of proof

Circular cause and consequence

Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard)

Correlation does not imply causation (*** hoc ergo propter hoc)

Equivocation

Fallacies of distribution

Division: where one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts

Ecological fallacy

Fallacy of many questions (complex question, fallacy of presupposition, loaded question, plurium interrogationum)

Fallacy of the single cause

Historian's fallacy

False attribution

Fallacy of quoting out of context

False compromise/middle ground

Gambler's fallacy: the incorrect belief that the likelihood of a random event can be affected by or predicted from other, independent events

Incomplete comparison

Inconsistent comparison

Intentional fallacy

Loki's Wager

Lump of labour fallacy (fallacy of labour scarcity, zero-sum fallacy)

Moving the goalpost

No true Scotsman

Perfect solution fallacy: where an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it was implemented

Post hoc ergo propter hoc: also known as false cause, coincidental correlation or correlation not causation.

Proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium)

Psychologist's fallacy

Regression fallacy

Reification (hypostatization)

Retrospective determinism (it happened so it was bound to)

Special pleading: where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption

Suppressed correlative: an argument which tries to redefine a correlative (two mutually exclusive options) so that one alternative encompasses the other, thus making one alternative impossible

Sunk cost fallacy

Wrong direction

Faulty generalizations:

Accident (fallacy): when an exception to the generalization is ignored

Cherry picking

Composition: where one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some (or even every) part of the whole

Dicto simpliciter

Converse accident (a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter): when an exception to a generalization is wrongly called for

False analogy

Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid)

Loki's Wager: insistence that because a concept cannot be clearly defined, it cannot be discussed

Misleading vividness

Overwhelming exception

Spotlight fallacy

Thought-terminating cliché: a commonly used phrase, sometimes passing as folk wisdom, used to quell cognitive dissonance.

Red herring fallacies:

A red herring is an argument, given in response to another argument, which does not address the original issue. See also irrelevant conclusion

Ad hominem: attacking the personal instead of the argument. A form of this is reductio ad Hitlerum.

Argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to force", "appeal to the stick"): where an argument is made through coercion or threats of force towards an opposing party

Argumentum ad populum ("appeal to belief", "appeal to the majority", "appeal to the people"): where a proposition is claimed to be true solely because many people believe it to be true

Association fallacy & Guilt by association

Appeal to authority: where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it

Appeal to consequences: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument concludes a premise is either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences for a particular party

Appeal to emotion: where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning

Appeal to fear: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side

Wishful thinking: a specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason

Appeal to spite: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party

There's more but it cut off the answer.  I hope you realize how ridiculous of a question this was