5 Logical Fallacies

-Argumentum ad logicam (argument to logic). This is the fallacy of assuming that something is false simply because a proof or argument that someone has offered for it is invalid; this reasoning is fallacious because there may be another proof or argument that successfully supports the proposition.
I imagine this scenario often being used in the court cases against unproved alibies.
-Argumentum ad misericordiam (argument or appeal to pity).
American's often use it to say things along the lines of "Think of all the poor, starving Ethiopian children! How could we be so cruel as not to help them"
-Naturalistic fallacy. This is the fallacy of trying to derive conclusions about what is right or good (that is, about values) from statements of fact alone. This is invalid because no matter how many statements of fact you assemble, any logical inference from them will be another statement of fact, not a statement of value. If you wish to reach conclusions about values, then you must include amongst your assumptions (or axioms, or premises) a statement of value. Once you have an axiomatic statement of value, then you may use it in conjunction with statements of fact to reach value-laden conclusions.
-Dicto simpliciter (spoken simply, i.e., sweeping generalization). This is the fallacy of making a sweeping statement and expecting it to be true of every specific case
This logical fallacy is often used when talking about women being inferior to men.
-Argumentum ad antiquitatem (the argument to antiquity or tradition). This is the familiar argument that some policy, behavior, or practice is right or acceptable because "it's always been done that way."
I think this is probably the most common and most widely used logical fallacy in which everyone can relate to. It can directly relate to every possible social norm worldwide.