Argumentum ad metum appeals to fear to make a conclusion acceptable. It is common in political or superstitious rhetoric where risks are exaggerated to bypass analysis.
Example
“If you do not support this reform, chaos will destroy society.”
(The danger is exaggerated to force agreement.)
Applied example (political)
“If this package is not approved, the country will collapse tomorrow.”
(Catastrophe is asserted without evidence.)
Applied example (superstitious)
“If you do not do the cleansing, something bad will happen to you.”
(Fear replaces verification.)
Why it is fallacious
- Fear does not prove the conclusion.
- Extreme scenarios are used without evidence.
- Emotional urgency blocks critical judgment.
How to spot it
- Catastrophic warnings without data.
- Alarmist or apocalyptic language.
- No alternatives or nuance.
How to respond
- Ask for evidence and real probabilities.
- Distinguish possibility from certainty.
- Evaluate options with objective criteria.
Fallacies
Spot fallacies in seconds
Try the AI fallacy detector on speeches, texts, or documents.