First, circular certification. For example, if you ask Xu Sanduo what is meaningful, he says that the meaningful thing is to live a good life. You asked what a good life is, and he said that a good life is to do something meaningful. This is caught in a circular argument, because the starting point of its attempt to reason is exactly the end point they want to prove. This conversation is meaningless.

Second, the false dilemma. For example, educating children, not studying hard, can only sell fish in the vegetable market for the rest of their lives. This is a preconceived assumption, there are only two choices, go to school or sell. In fact, there are other options, such as being a cleaner. Your argument presents a false dilemma.

Third, the origin fallacy. For example, Archimedes discovered the principle of buoyancy while taking a bath. Western philosophy does not belong to our ancestors. These are all fallacies of origin. Because the truth of a theory has nothing to do with its origin.

Fourth, resort to authority. For example, a professor at Yanshan University overthrew the theory of relativity. Can relativity be overthrown? Whether it is overthrown has nothing to do with the author's identity. As long as it is verified by strict logic and experiments, it has nothing to do with identity.

Fifth, appeal to the public, such as not taking a bath after confinement. Everyone has said this for thousands of years. It must be true. What people think is true or false, you should also ask why. Because many times, people are not the embodiment of truth, and many times they are still the representatives of ignorance.

Sixth, resort to motivation, which is the so-called main line. For example, that blogger talks about western ideas every day but doesn't talk about eastern ideas. He must be a lackey sent by the west. This makes the mistake of guessing the motive. We can only criticize based on opinions and facts, and the motivation is beyond doubt. As for motivation, it is a logical error.