Especially on social media, I have been seeing people who would literally write an essay for the sake of the argument, which actually does not require much attention in discussion. Yet, I would see people being all hyper active for proving their perspectives or dis-agreements of the contents to the point at times being emotionally distracted from the real life situation one is residing in.
I sort of admire the enthusiasm of those persons as I would never bring myself to participate in one as those seem to me extremely energy draining and mostly unworthy of my time and mental health.
I mean I adore discussions, argumentative contexts and all, but as exceptionally concerned of not to disrupt my mental health from bitterness, I hardly participate in any as a precaution. In real life discussion, having long discussions is quite amusing and convenient in various ways than a virtual one, which only involves writing.
I was a great admirer of "debate" and used to be an active member of the club until college, which I have enjoyed a great deal. During any discussion, I idealistically stick to the logic and for having a greater acceptance rate in me, I have not had the scope to be intertwined with "FALLACY".
That is the reason I know little to none about the various types of fallacy or actually studying the concepts of fallacies. Due to a recent circumstance, I came to learn some well established fallacies, which astonished me after being understanding of those and relating to the pre-existing contexts.
Thus I have been officially gathering some of my time to spend in reading and comprehending the various types of infamously practiced fallacies.
And that actually opened a whole new world of argumentative side of the people. That led me to discover the answer of
"why are they being so irrelevant where most of the arguments that I had found absurd at extreme manners yet people would persistently stick to it! Not only that, but I realized I myself have sometimes used some of the fallacies without my knowledge during intense moments of arguments, which actually was impactful!
That new door of knowledge actually made me realize that one can win a nasty situation if not wanting to participate but not being able to leave as well with some fallacy theories!
Indeed, I do not need to explain these to the dear readers, however, I certainly can provide you with some tricks and tips that might come in handy to not perhaps win but escape an odd, unwanted circumstance, while not being rude to the other person(s), regardless of their intention.
Also, though fallacies are the very reason for a fallacy, however, I would like to mention and do discourage using some fallacies, which are rather rude and surprisingly we tend to mention those without perhaps knowing about it often.
One can use "Straw man" fallacy but should not bring "Ad hominem" fallacy into the context.
Because "ad hominem" fallacy is where someone attacks the person himself instead of the topic of discussion, which evidently leads to being personal or attacking personally. For instance
See these examples? They are not staying in the arguments and simply diverting the attack towards the person portraying that one rather a bad person or making him feel negative emotions, while that is straight impolite and occasionally actually is an abusive manner. The other infamous one that is often used along with "ad hominem" is "Guilt by association" (literally condemning someone for his/her association while they are absolutely irrelevant) fallacy, which is straight abusive and more dishonoring, much more negative than "ad hominem".
Be aware of the "appeal to authority" fallacy, ignorant people use this fallacy often to forcefully establish a false information truth, which actually often shuts down a good point. If that happens, better one should actually verify or ask them to substantiate with something abstract right then and there.
Same goes for "appeal to tradition" that wants desirable establishment of something by claiming tradition or popularity
(Bandwagon fallacy), or origin of something (genetic fallacy), and "appeal to pity/emotion" where one tries to justify something by taking advantage of a pitiful or emotional situation.
And actually these categories of fallacies are rather a dangerous and sensitive one to refute and be safely restrained from the situation upon arousal, which might lead to "slippery slope" fallacy. So if that happens, I would prefer to not be involved any further the moment it is claimed by another party.
Source
Sometimes, to win a desired situation, "Strawman", "slippery slope", or "Red herring"fallacies can be smart choices.
All the contents are mine unitl mentioned otherwise.