What Is This Fallacy?

I was thinking of Confirmation Bias but this strikes me as faulty reasoning--a fallacy.  It appears related to jumping to conclusions.   I notice some writers refer to what I described as the "a priori fallacy". https://www2.humboldt.edu/act/HTML/tests/fallacy3/3.1a.html

2 questions:

1)  (I know this has been discussed before):  Doesn't a bias (which refers to a mental state, such as a way of looking at the world), become a fallacy when it results in a faulty argument?   As a result of a bias, the proponent makes an argument using faulty reasoning.  

2) I noticed at least one fallacy on the website (there may be more) that isn't in your 2021 book.  Do you continuously update your website, including adding fallacies and/ or editing fallacies as needed?  Do you ever remove fallacies?

I was thinking of Confirmation Bias but this strikes me as faulty reasoning--a fallacy.  It appears related to jumping to conclusions. 

Jumping to conclusions is reaching a premature conclusion without taking the time to reason through the argument or decision. E.g. a young couple see a nice-looking house, and decide to buy it immediately, without checking it out physically (or with very superficial checks).

The OP talks about picking a conclusion, then looking for evidence to support it - that's confirmation bias (not a fallacy) - it's a systemic tendency to support evidence that confirms one's point-of-view. If you assume something to be true, it's easier to interpret new evidence as 'confirming' that belief.

1)  (I know this has been discussed before):  Doesn't a bias (which refers to a mental state, such as a way of looking at the world), become a fallacy when it results in a faulty argument?   As a result of a bias, the proponent makes an argument using faulty reasoning.  

Yes, but it has to be in the form of an argument. E.g. in the context of a debate, picking a conclusion and then looking for evidence to back it up might be considered cherry picking. The tendency to confirm one's own views on its own is not a faulty argument, because it isn't an argument. It's just a state of mind.

2) I noticed at least one fallacy on the website (there may be more) that isn't in your 2021 book.  Do you continuously update your website, including adding fallacies and/ or editing fallacies as needed?  Do you ever remove fallacies?

Firstly, yes, Dr Bo updates the website with new fallacies, either based on his own research/observations or by the suggestion of members (of course, he'd have to research those too). Second, from what I remember, he is working on a new edition of Logically Fallacious, which will contain the new fallacies he's introduced (e.g. fact-to-fiction fallacy or imposter fallacy).

I don't recall him ever removing a fallacy...though I've only been here since March 2020, so I probably don't know much.
 

As with many fallacies, they overlap, so there is a little bit of all those things in your original comment. 

We talked about something similar when we were discussing Double Standard  and Special Pleading.   You can start with a biased way of looking at things (like Double Standard) and then apply that bias to make fallacious arguments (Special Pleading).   It would seem that reaching a conclusion first and then arguing with anything you can to support it is fallacious reasoning--resulting from bias such as Confirmation Bias..