Perhaps it's worth pointing out that the ability to name the individual fallacies, as is typical in introductory material on fallacies, is not a useful skill. U

Perhaps it's worth pointing out that the ability to name the individual fallacies, as is typical in introductory material on fallacies, is not a useful skill. Understanding the truth tables, the concepts of necessity and sufficiency, and perhaps a couple of other related concepts, are what actually matters when it comes to understanding the truth or falsehood of basic arguments. The truth of this is probably apparent to anyone who has ever worked through a typical Philosophy 101 midterm. On the exam you apply your mind to spotting the problem or problems with an argument first, and then compare that problem to an index of goofy latin names for fallacies that you've perhaps memorized. Knowing the names of fallacies is only important to the people who care about the names of fallacies (a category that, strangely, does not include the philosophy professors administering these exams).