%% Image selected per Image Pickin' thread: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1432555535090206200
%% Please do not replace or remove without starting a new thread.


->''"'All wood burns,' states Sir Bedevere. 'Therefore,' he concludes, 'all that burns is wood.' This is, of course, pure bullshit. Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted: all of Alma Cogan is dead, but only some of the class of dead people are Alma Cogan."''
-->-- "A Lesson in Logic", ''Film/MontyPythonAndTheHolyGrail (Soundtrack from the Motion Picture)''

Claiming a quality of one thing is also a quality of another thing because they have some other thing in common, e.g. "Water is a liquid. Water will put out most fires. Therefore, any liquid will put out most fires." As it turns out, liquid oxygen tends to encourage rather than extinguish a fire.

!!'''Guilt by Association''':
!!! Also called:
* [[HitlerAteSugar Reductio Ad Hitlerum]], when the association is specifically made to [[UsefulNotes/AdolfHitler Hitler]] [[note]]And a missed opportinuty to be called Reductio Adolphus[[/note]].
* Reductio ad Nazium, when the association is made to [[ThoseWackyNazis the Nazis]].
* Reductio ad Communum, when the association is made to [[DirtyCommunists Communists]].
* Broad Brush
* Sweeping Generalization
* Russia Iran Disco Suck, when two things are supposedly related because the same person dislikes both.
* SinsOfOurFathers and FamilyHonor, when the association is familial.

:: Guilt By Association assumes that two separate things share a negative factor because they share a different, unrelated factor, usually a relation to some undesirable person or ideology. (See also StopBeingStereotypical, DontShootTheMessage.)

* Equating complex calendars with human sacrifice because the ancient Aztecs had a complex calendar, and also practiced human sacrifice.
* Commonly used in arguments about religion:
--> Pat Robertson said crazy things about Haitian voodoo practices causing the earthquake.
--> Pat Robertson is a Christian.
--> Therefore Christians are crazy.
--> or
--> Stalin was evil.
--> Stalin was an atheist.
--> Therefore atheists are evil.
** This is also often done with Hitler; adding insult to injury, Hitler also often gets used for the reverse.[[note]]It's unclear what exactly Hitler's religious views were. He was RaisedCatholic, though what his public statements favoring Catholicism meant versus private ones disparaging it (and Christianity) mean is hard to say. At the very least we can say he wasn't an atheist, often invoking God in his speeches, private statements and writings (the regime persecuted atheists, along with religious dissidents). Whether or not he was Christian in later life (and if so, how orthodox) is an open question, particularly since sources close to him at that time like Martin Bormann, a notoriously militant atheist, are not particularly reliable.[[/note]] Also see HitlerAteSugar.
* In ''Film/MontyPythonAndTheHolyGrail'', they use this to prove a woman is a witch.
--> [[BurnTheWitch They burn witches.]]
--> They burn wood.
--> Therefore witches must be made of wood.
--> Wood floats.
--> Ducks float.
--> Therefore anything that weighs the same as a duck must be made of wood.
--> She weighs the same as a duck.
--> Therefore, she must also be made of wood, and therefore, a witch.
** Of course, in this instance they were ''[[TheCuckoolanderWasRight completely right]]''.
* You get compared to Your Obnoxious/Loser Relative, with the implication that because they aren't model citizens, whatever it is you're doing or thinking is wrong and must be stopped immediately:
-->You give a detailed and well-researched argument on a subject.
-->Your mother/cousin/sibling/whatever turns up his/her nose and declares, "You're acting just like (insert "know-it-all" relative here)!"
-->OR You're doing something a family member doesn't approve of, which Your Loser Relative also happened/happens to do.
-->Your family member declares: "You're acting just like Your Loser Relative!"
* ''Series/SaturdayNightLive''[='s=] spoof of John [=McCain's=] [[AttackOfThePoliticalAd political ads]]:
--> ''"Barack Obama plays basketball. Charles Barkley plays basketball. Is Charles Barkley qualified to lead our economy?"''
* Australia has proposed [[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/28/australian_censors/ banning porn that stars small-breasted women]] because since children have no breasts and pedophiles like children, anyone who likes small-breasted women [[PaedoHunt must be a pedophile]]. Thankfully nothing seems to have come of it.
* Some teetotaller sects of Christianity maintain that Jesus never drank wine, based on logic which is sort of an inverse of this fallacy; an anti-association fallacy if you will:
--> Alcohol is Bad (reasons vary as to ''why'' it's bad. [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment Don't get into it, just accept that it's a premise of the argument]])
--> Jesus is Good
--> Because Jesus is Good, Jesus only does and associates with Good things (again, [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment there are flaws in the logic best left alone]])
--> Ergo, because alcohol is Bad, Jesus never partook of it.
** In order to make this work, any time wine is referenced in a positive context (for example, Jesus' first miracle), the word is instead rendered as "unfermented grape juice" when translated into English. Never mind that "unfermented grape juice" was essentially an impossibility until the late 19th century (by the time you, a Russian landholder, gathered enough grapes to produce "unfermented" grape juice, enough of the grapes had started fermenting anyway that choosing ''not'' to ferment them was economic suicide.)
** Not to mention that the word "oinos" was used for wine both in verses warning against drinking ''to excess'' and also in verses that praise its virtues, such as declaring that a new man born in Christ is like "new wine" or that "wine makes for a merry heart", not to mention the wine that Jesus turned the water into at the feast (the first recorded miracle, by the way). If it's all the same word, why would it sometimes mean "alcoholic beverage capable of causing drunkenness" and other times mean "unfermented grape juice" based solely one whether it's being described negatively or positively?
* It has been suggested that, in the late 1960s and early '70s, some right-wing white Americans felt a particular resentment toward the UsefulNotes/CivilRightsMovement because it emerged at roughly the same time as the sexual revolution and the drug culture, and therefore the two were sometimes linked. The already widespread perception that young people in the '60s professed a great love for black music and that black music itself was inherently sexualized and contained occasional drug references certainly didn't help. The result was that quite a few of these people saw the hippies as basically "niggers" with white skin [[InsultBackfire (an insult that many hippies were all too happy to appropriate)]]. The association persists in the present day, particularly since UsefulNotes/BarackObama was elected President disproportionately by minorities, and his administration appears to have ushered in much more tolerance for such practices as homosexuality and birth control.
** The civil rights movement was also associated with communism, as some prominent Communist Party members were also part of the civil rights movement, since the Soviets never overlooked the chance to give the U.S. some bad P.R.[[note]]Naturally, this was very hypocritical, given that the Soviet Union treated ethnic minorities even worse. Entire peoples were transferred to Siberia, for instance.[[/note]] Given that this was the height of [[RedScare McCarthyism]], this caused a lot of right-wing white Americans to associate civil rights and black people with communism. This still persists today in claims that UsefulNotes/BarackObama is a secret Marxist.
** The role played by communists in the civil rights movement in the US, especially in the 1930's, was quite large. Many prominent civil rights activists, like Paul Robeson, were either themselves communists or sympathized with them. More mainstream civil rights organizations [[DontShootTheMessage really went out of their way to avoid all communists or communist sympathizers]] to avoid being associated. Unfortunately, this also meant that the civil rights movement in the first half of 20th century [[WeAreStrugglingTogether was splintered badly]].
* Wrestling/{{Sting}} apparently [[FaceHeelTurn turned heel]] early in 2010 when he attacked Wrestling/HulkHogan with his black baseball bat. Not long afterward, he attacked Wrestling/RobVanDam in a similar fashion. Sting was a DesignatedVillain until October of that year, when it became clear to everyone that all along Hogan had been plotting a conspiracy to take over Wrestling/{{TNA}}, in much the same way he had with Wrestling/{{WCW}} [[CallBack 14 years earlier]]; Van Dam, however, did not join Hogan's conspiracy. When Van Dam confronted Sting about the unfairness of this, Sting admitted he'd been wrong, but also defended himself by pointing out that Hogan and RVD had entered TNA at about the same time, and it was natural to assume (in Sting's mind, anyway) that they were working together.
* [[{{Narm}} This line]] from ''VideoGame/KingdomHeartsII''[[labelnote:Explanation]]Nobodies are the dark side selves of people[[/labelnote]]:
--> ''"If light and darkness are eternal, then surely we Nobodies are the same. Eternal!"''
* In ''WesternAnimation/{{Metalocalypse}}'', Nathan Explosion delivers one in order to convince the other members of the band to drink bleach.
--> '''Nathan:''' Bleach is healthy. It's mostly water, and ''we're'' mostly water, therefore, we are bleach.
* If one shows up at an event that featured pornography, they will be treated as if they did pornographic activities, even if they were not involved in any pornographic segments or if it was a video with pornographic segments added afterwards without the knowledge of those involved, such as happened to some wrestlers who worked for Rob Black's XPW, like Nicole Bass.
* UsefulNotes/AlanTuring confessed in a personal letter that his greatest fear when facing his upcoming trial for "Gross Indecency" was what result it would have on his life's work.
-->I am rather afraid that the following syllogism will be used in the future: \\
Turing Believes that Machines can Think. \\
Turing Lies with Men. \\
Therefore Machines cannot Think
** Thankfully, while his view that machines can think ''is'' criticized by some, it hasn't been on the grounds that he was homosexual and thus wrong.
* Harold Weir on ''Series/FreaksAndGeeks'' would end anecdotes about people who do things he disapproves of with "You know where X is now? He's dead." This is whether or not there was any causal link between what they did and their death.
* Due to the Creator/SpikeTV's incarnation of ''Ren and Stimpy'' being made specifically for older viewers (hence the name "'Adult' Party Cartoon), and due to the nature of a number of episodes of [[WesternAnimation/TheRenAndStimpyShow the original Nickelodeon series]] (which, for better or for worse, was intended to be a family show[[note]]The infamous [[Recap/RenandStimpy2x07SonofStimpy Son of Stimpy]] episode notwithstanding.[[/note]]), this has caused some people (and websites, including Wiki/TheOtherWiki) to refer to the entirety of the franchise (such as it is) as being "adult" animation, which unfortunately was partially brought on by both the show, and Viacom (and by extension, [[Creator/JohnKricfalusi the original creator]]) themselves due to reruns of the original show also being shown on Spike TV. Because of this, Creator/{{Nickelodeon}} (who has been planning a number of reboots of older Nicktoons) has officially declared the original show to be ExiledFromContinuity, although The Splat (now [=NickSplat=]) still occasionally shows reruns of the original show, and the DVD release of the original show from Paramount continues to be available.

!!! '''[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum Reductio ad Hitlerum]]'''
:: A very common form of Guilt by Association is "Hitler did it, therefore it's bad." While persuasive, it's not always true, since while Hitler did a lot of evil things, he also was a massive advocate of animal rights (well, definitely more so than Jewish, gay, or Roma rights...), built motorways, painted pictures, hosted the Olympics, [[HitlerAteSugar ate sugar]], and breathed oxygen. This is related to the Fallacy of Division, since it assumes the evilness of the whole of Hitler also applies to any part of Hitler. Related to GodwinsLaw and HitlerAteSugar.

* An anti-abortion ''ComicBook/ChickTract'' claims abortion is wrong because Hitler killed Jewish babies, and therefore doctors who carry out abortions are as bad as Hitler.[[note]]To put it more accurately, Hitler believed both in killing Jewish babies and in ''not'' killing Aryan babies, so neither side has a leg to stand on here. Except of course, the pro-choice side, as the one thing Hitler definitely ''wasn't'' in favour of was letting "Aryan" and Jewish women themselves decide whether to have abortions.[[/note]]
* There's an interesting inversion of this [[MemeticMutation making the rounds on the internet.]] Whenever some distressing news is revealed to the world, someone will inevitably use the clip from ''Film/{{Downfall}}'' where Hitler has a VillainousBreakdown upon learning that Berlin will be overrun. The person making the video will often put their words into ''Hitler's'' mouth. This is usually a case of EvenEvilHasStandards, with the intended message being "Even Hitler thinks that's going too far".
--> "Y'know, Hitler was a vegetarian."
--> "Vegetarianism then: not all it's cracked up to be. In some extreme cases may cause genocide." -- Bill Bailey
* One of the posters on Conservapedia apparently does not like either mainline Protestants or people who play video games, and was quick to note that James Holmes (the [[Film/TheDarkKnight "Joker"]] killer in Aurora, Colorado) was both Presbyterian and a video game fanatic. The obvious inference is that there is something intrinsic in both Presbyterianism and video games that can cause people associated with them to become mass murderers. By that logic, one might as well say that, because most serial killers are men, all men must be serial killers.
* Used and played with in one book of ''Literature/TheDresdenFiles'' when a minor villain tries to justify killing a single mother.
-->'''Harry:''' For god's sake, [[spoiler:Trixie]], she's got kids.
-->[[spoiler:'''Trixie Vixen]]:''' [[EpicFail So did Hitler.]]
-->'''Harry:''' No, he had ''dogs''.

!!! Looks like this fallacy but is not:
* When an example is used to establish a fact about a group in the aggregate, rather than about members of that group. For instance, noting instances of gay men who are HIV positive and concluding that gay men have higher rates of HIV is not a fallacy (assuming valid statistical techniques are used). Concluding that a particular gay man is HIV positive ''is'' a fallacy.
* When a member of a group is presented as an example of a common feature at work, rather than proof in itself that there is a common feature. For instance, it is valid to use the 9/11 attacks and abortion-clinic bombings as examples of how ''radical'' Muslims and Christians ''can be'' evil. They are ''not'', on the other hand, examples of how ''all'' Muslims and Christians ''are'' evil. Capiche? The same also applies in regards to the frequent claim that because Marxists were atheists, this shows atheism is evil. Again, all it proves is that atheists with totalitarian ideologies are evil.
* Discussions where the subject manner can be seriously compared to Hitler (or slavery, etc.) For instance, comparing the forced labor camps, purges, etc. under Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia without making the leap that those things are bad BECAUSE Hitler/Stalin did them.

!! '''Honor by Association''':

:: The flip side of Guilt by Association, stating that two things share a positive quality because they share a different, unrelated quality.

* One Usenet poster who claims "we should all become vegetarian" claims in his sign that "Jesus was a vegetarian". His reasoning: vegetarianism is good; Jesus was good; therefore Jesus must have been a vegetarian. Which assumes that vegetarianism is "Good" by all standards and values of those who hold that Jesus Christ was good '''and''' that Jesus is believed to be "Good" by everyone.
** Other people use a somewhat more complicated, but just as fallacious version of this argument: because Jesus's teachings and behaviors were most in line with the Essene sect, Jesus must have been an Essene, and because the Essenes were mostly vegetarian (pescatarian, actually, but they leave out that part), Jesus must have been a vegetarian and because Jesus is good, vegetarianism is good and he would therefore hate killing animals as much as they do. Never mind that the Essenes weren't vegetarian out of compassion for animals, but rather because they believed anything created from sexual union was treif (unclean), while thinking that fish spawned via abiogenesis in the waters and were therefore kosher. Of course that part gets left out, too.
** Most first-century Jews were pescatarian anyway, if only because fish was a much more reliable source of food in their part of the world.
* ''Series/GameOfThrones'': This exchange from "[[Recap/GameOfThronesS2E3WhatIsDeadMayNeverDie What Is Dead May Never Die]]". It's not precisely Honor by Association, but it certainly isn't guilt, either:
-->'''Hot Pie:''' [[BlatantLies I've seen lots of battles!]] I saw...\\
'''Arya:''' Liar.\\
'''Hot Pie:''' [[AnecdotalFallacy I saw a man killing another]] at a tavern in Flea's Bottom. Stabbed him right in the neck.\\
'''Lommy:''' Two men fighting is no battle.\\
'''Hot Pie:''' They got armor on.\\
'''Arya:''' So?\\
'''Hot Pie:''' So if they got armor on, it's a battle.\\
'''Lommy:''' No, it isn't.\\
'''Hot Pie:''' [[AdHominem What does a dyer's apprentice know about battles, anyway?]]\\
'''Arya:''' Gendry's an armorer's apprentice. Hot Pie, tell Gendry what makes a fight into a battle.\\
'''Hot Pie:''' It's, uh, when they've got armor on.\\
'''Gendry:''' And who told you that?\\
'''Hot Pie:''' [[AppealToAuthority A knight.]]\\
'''Gendry:''' How'd you know he was a knight?\\
'''Hot Pie:''' Wells, cause he's got a-armor on.\\
'''Gendry:''' You don't have to be a knight to have armor. Any idiot can buy armor!\\
'''Hot Pie:''' How'd you know?\\
'''Gendry:''' [[WhatAnIdiot Because I sold armor!]]
* ''WesternAnimation/SouthPark'':
-->'''Scott:''' ''"All of these things link Terrance to the murder: hair fibers, blood samples, nail clippings, a piece of his shirt. A watch with his initials on it, a day planner with the murder scheduled, a haiku called "Time to Kill Dr. Jeffrey O'Dwyer." "Dr. O'Dwyer / time to have your head smashed in / with my new hammer." Terrance, you may be a famous surgeon, but you're not God. J'accuse, Terrance!"''\\
'''Phillip:''' ''"Good people of the jury, my client Terrance is no more a murderer than you or me. He loves puppies and hates mean things. Would a murderer go to the zoo and feed animals like this?"''
** The argument here is that Terrance has done a thing associated with kind people, so he must be one. This is, of course, enough for the jury to acquit him on the spot (or as soon as farting allows).

!!! Looks like this fallacy but is not:
* When the example is being used to show that there is overlap in the members of two groups, but not to state or imply that the overlap is total. For instance, saying "many (or even most) vegetarians are good, moral people" is not this. On the other hand, saying it might be misleading: one hopes that ''most'' people are good, moral people.
** Specifically-refuting the idea that an overlap between two groups is total, looks like an Association Fallacy, but isn't. The "Hitler was a vegetarian" sort of argument is most often this; not arguing that all vegetarians are genocidal dictators, but refuting the idea that vegetarians are all by definition good people. For example:
*** In ''VideoGame/MetalGearSolid'', Otacon states matter-of-factly that liking dogs is irrefutable proof that a person is decent, deep down. Snake immediately points out that Hitler was a big fan of dogs. Interesting in that while it applies under this variant, the exchange is often mistaken for an example of the Argumentum Ad Hitlerium fallacy. But Snake isn't saying liking dogs is bad; he's just shooting down Otacon's fallacy by pointing out a bad person who liked dogs.