Presently, I'm struggling to distinguish the various kinds of logical fallacies. More specifically, I need to determine the proper definition of the anecdotal fallacy.
This arises out of last night's practice quiz question treating of Socrates' Apology. It's the place where he's maintaining that in condemning him to death, the assembly really isn't doing him any harm, since death is either a dreamless sleep, or else a chance to meet and converse with the good and the great from the past. To buttress his assertion that sleep without dreams is a good and pleasant thing, he appeals to common experience. He asserts that everyone, from kings to slaves, including "you," the citizens sitting in judgement over him, knows by experience that this is true. Can't exactly recall how the question was phrased, but I chose the answer saying that he is appealing to empirical (or experiential) evidence which could perhaps be confirmed by formal study. (Or disproven, which is the nature of experiment). The official answer was that Socrates was appealing to anecdotal evidence, and his argument was therefore faulty.
(And in that case (grumble, grumble), "red herring" had jolly well better be one of the multiple choice options.)