@DrewDad,
I don't think the author did it to be accessible (most people don't know what logical fallacies are anyway, so it's not like it was a more accessible way to approach it) but because the author just found out about the term and has no idea what it really means.
The first thing in the list is just a recent theory (that we evolved to prefer to win arguments instead of find the truth) and really has very little to do with logical fallacies (of which there might have only been one legitimate one mentioned in the article).
Anyway, I'm not knocking cracked, I've run into plenty of articles there that I found humorous, which is clearly what they go for, instead of scholarship.