No. They distinguish the Harry Potter fallacy from the fallacy fallacy.
Students, once they learn the fallacies, just love to spot them and charge others with committing them, and so expect that dropping some Latin name for an opponent’s argumentative move will be a kind of magic that fixes the critical discussion (often in their favor). Call it the Harry Potter problem, thinking that learning a little Latin phrase will paralyze an opponent with its expression. So entirely new kinds of wild and woolly behavior are encouraged with this vocabulary. Without fallacy theory teaching the fallacies, there would be no burden of specious allegations of fallacy. Further, new fallacies are made possible--take for example, the fallacy fallacy, inferring that an opponent’s position is false because it is supported by fallacious arguments.
If a blind person told you that they believed that the sky is blue because someone told them it is, would you respond that that's argumentum ad verecundiam and therefore the sky is not blue?
Students, once they learn the fallacies, just love to spot them and charge others with committing them, and so expect that dropping some Latin name for an opponent’s argumentative move will be a kind of magic that fixes the critical discussion (often in their favor). Call it the Harry Potter problem, thinking that learning a little Latin phrase will paralyze an opponent with its expression. So entirely new kinds of wild and woolly behavior are encouraged with this vocabulary. Without fallacy theory teaching the fallacies, there would be no burden of specious allegations of fallacy. Further, new fallacies are made possible--take for example, the fallacy fallacy, inferring that an opponent’s position is false because it is supported by fallacious arguments.