مغالطات Flashcards
all of it. (319 cards)
1
Q
What is the Special Pleading Fallacy?
A
It’s when someone applies a rule to others but makes an unjustified exception for themselves or their argument.
2
Q
Why is Special Pleading a fallacy?
A
Because it introduces an arbitrary exception without valid reasoning, undermining the fairness or consistency of the argument.
3
Q
How can you identify Special Pleading?
A
Look for cases where someone creates an exception to a rule without a valid, logical reason.
4
Q
What is an example of Special Pleading?
A
“Everyone should follow the speed limit, but I’m allowed to speed because I’m late.”
5
Q
What is a non-fallacious way to justify an exception?
A
Provide evidence or reasoning that demonstrates why the exception is logically or morally justified.
6
Q
How can you avoid Special Pleading?
A
Apply the same rules consistently to all parties, including yourself, unless there is a valid and well-supported reason for an exception.
7
Q
What is the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
A
It’s when someone redefines a group or category to exclude counterexamples that challenge their claim.
8
Q
Why is the No True Scotsman Fallacy problematic?
A
Because it avoids addressing valid counterexamples by arbitrarily redefining the group.
9
Q
What is an example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
A
“No true Scotsman puts sugar in their porridge,” dismissing a counterexample of a Scotsman who does.
10
Q
How can you identify the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
A
Look for cases where someone dismisses a counterexample by saying, “No true [group member] would do that.”
11
Q
How can you avoid the No True Scotsman Fallacy?
A
Accept counterexamples as valid and refine your argument to address them instead of redefining the group.
12
Q
What is an example of the fallacy in religion?
A
“No true Christian would ever be unkind,” dismissing examples of unkind Christians.
13
Q
What’s the difference between the No True Scotsman Fallacy and a valid exception?
A
A valid exception is based on clear, consistent criteria, while the fallacy arbitrarily redefines the group to dismiss inconvenient examples.
14
Q
What is the Cherry Picking Fallacy?
A
It’s when someone selectively presents evidence that supports their argument while ignoring evidence that contradicts it.
15
Q
Why is Cherry Picking a fallacy?
A
Because it creates a biased or incomplete picture of the situation, leading to misleading conclusions.
16
Q
What is an example of Cherry Picking?
A
“Crime is decreasing because one neighborhood had a 20% drop,” ignoring increases in other neighborhoods.
17
Q
How can you identify Cherry Picking?
A
Look for evidence that is selectively chosen to support a claim while ignoring contradictory evidence.
18
Q
How can you avoid Cherry Picking?
A
Consider all relevant evidence, both supporting and contradicting your argument, before drawing conclusions.
19
Q
What is an example of Cherry Picking in health claims?
A
“Eating chocolate is healthy because it contains antioxidants,” ignoring its high sugar and fat content.
20
Q
What’s the difference between Cherry Picking and focusing on relevant evidence?
A
Cherry Picking involves ignoring contradictory evidence, while focusing on relevant evidence considers the full context of the argument.
21
Q
What is the Wishful Thinking Fallacy?
A
It’s when someone believes something is true or false simply because they want it to be that way, rather than basing it on evidence or logic.
22
Q
Why is Wishful Thinking a fallacy?
A
Because it replaces critical thinking with emotional desire, leading to beliefs that may not align with reality.
23
Q
What is an example of Wishful Thinking?
A
“I don’t need to study for the exam because I know I’ll do well,” without any evidence or preparation.
24
Q
How can you identify Wishful Thinking?
A
Look for beliefs that are based on hope, fear, or desire instead of evidence or rationality.
25
How can you avoid Wishful Thinking?
Focus on evidence and logic, even if the reality is uncomfortable or doesn’t align with your desires.
26
What is an example of Wishful Thinking in science denial?
"Climate change can’t be real because it’s too scary to think about."
27
What’s the difference between optimism and Wishful Thinking?
Optimism is hoping for the best while acknowledging reality, whereas Wishful Thinking ignores reality in favor of what you want to believe.
28
What is the Base Rate Fallacy?
It occurs when someone ignores the general probability (base rate) of an event and focuses on specific information, leading to flawed reasoning.
29
Why is the Base Rate Fallacy a problem?
It leads to incorrect conclusions by undervaluing general statistical information in favor of anecdotal or specific data.
30
Give an example of the Base Rate Fallacy in medical diagnosis.
A test for a rare disease (1 in 10,000) is 99% accurate. A positive result doesn’t mean the person has the disease because the base rate of the disease is so low.
31
How can you avoid the Base Rate Fallacy?
Always consider the base rate (general probability) first, then combine it with specific evidence using logical reasoning.
32
What is Bayesian reasoning, and how does it relate to the Base Rate Fallacy?
Bayesian reasoning combines base rates with specific evidence to make more accurate probability judgments, helping to avoid the Base Rate Fallacy.
33
What is the Masked Man Fallacy?
It’s a logical error where someone assumes that if two things are identical, they must share all the same properties, including knowledge or beliefs about them.
34
What is an example of the Masked Man Fallacy?
"I know who my father is, but I don’t know who the masked man is. Therefore, my father is not the masked man."
35
What is the main error in the Masked Man Fallacy?
Confusing knowledge or belief about something with the actual identity or properties of the thing itself.
36
How can you avoid the Masked Man Fallacy?
By understanding that your knowledge or belief about something doesn’t determine its actual identity or properties.
37
What is the typical structure of the Masked Man Fallacy?
1. I know X about A
2. I don't know X about B
3. Therefore, A ≠ B (invalid conclusion)
38
What's the classic example of the Masked Man Fallacy?
"I know who my father is, but I don't know who that masked man is. Therefore, that masked man cannot be my father."
39
Why is the Masked Man Fallacy incorrect?
It confuses properties of our knowledge with properties of the actual things. Our knowledge (or lack of it) doesn't change the identity of things.
40
How might this fallacy appear in everyday life?
"I know my coworker John likes coffee, but I don't know if the person who ate my lunch likes coffee. Therefore, John couldn't have eaten my lunch."
41
What is the Appeal to Probability fallacy?
A logical error where someone treats something that is merely possible or probable as if it were certain or already true.
42
What is the typical structure of an Appeal to Probability?
1. X could happen (possibility)
2. Therefore, X will happen (invalid conclusion)
OR
1. X is likely to happen
2. Therefore, we should treat X as if it has already happened
43
What's a common example of Appeal to Probability?
"You shouldn't drive a car because you might get into an accident." (Treats a possibility as if it were a certainty)
44
Why is the Appeal to Probability fallacious?
It confuses possibility or probability with certainty. Just because something could happen doesn't mean it will happen or should be treated as if it has happened.
45
How does this fallacy appear in everyday decision-making?
"Don't invest in stocks because you might lose money." This fallacy prevents rational risk assessment by treating a possibility as an inevitability.
46
What is the Red Herring Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone introduces an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue being discussed.
47
Where does the term "Red Herring" come from?
From the practice of using smoked herring (which turns red) to train hunting dogs or to throw them off a scent trail.
48
What is the typical structure of a Red Herring argument?
1. Topic A is being discussed
2. Person introduces unrelated Topic B
3. Discussion shifts to Topic B
4. Topic A remains unresolved
49
What's a classic example of a Red Herring?
"Why did you fail the exam?" - "Well, many students are failing classes these days due to social media addiction." (Diverts from personal responsibility to a broader social issue)
50
How can you recognize a Red Herring?
Look for:
- Sudden topic changes
- Introduction of emotional but irrelevant issues
- Responses that don't address the original point
- Attempts to shift focus to broader or unrelated issues
51
What is the Linda Problem?
A psychological experiment that reveals how people often violate basic probability rules by judging a conjunction (A AND B) as more likely than one of its components (A) alone.
52
Why is the conjunction fallacy mathematically wrong?
The probability of two events occurring together (A AND B) can never be greater than the probability of either event occurring alone. P(A AND B) ≤ P(A) and P(A AND B) ≤ P(B)
53
Why do people fall for the Linda Problem?
People often use representativeness heuristic (mental shortcut) instead of probability rules. They choose what "fits better" with the description rather than what's mathematically more probable.
54
How does the Linda Problem affect real-life decision making?
It can lead to poor judgments in:
- Risk assessment
- Medical diagnoses
- Investment decisions
- Legal reasoning
- Stereotyping
55
How can you avoid the conjunction fallacy?
- Focus on basic probability rules
- Draw Venn diagrams
- Remember: specific combinations are always less likely than general categories
- Question intuitive judgments
56
What is Affirming the Consequent?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly concludes that if a conditional statement's consequent (Q) is true, its antecedent (P) must also be true.
57
What's the basic structure of this fallacy?
1. If P, then Q
2. Q is true
3. Therefore, P is true (Invalid!)
58
What's a simple example of Affirming the Consequent?
1. If it's raining, the ground is wet (If P, then Q)
2. The ground is wet (Q is true)
3. Therefore, it must be raining (Invalid conclusion P)
(The ground could be wet for many other reasons!)
59
Why is Affirming the Consequent fallacious?
Because there might be multiple causes (P1, P2, P3...) that could lead to the same result (Q). Just because Q is true doesn't mean any specific P caused it.
60
How can you recognize this fallacy?
Look for:
- If/then statements
- Observation of the result (Q)
- Conclusion about the cause (P)
- Ignoring other possible causes
61
What is the Fallacy of Composition?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly concludes that what's true for individual parts must be true for the whole system or group.
62
What's the key distinction to remember about the Fallacy of Composition?
Properties of parts don't necessarily transfer to the whole. What's true for individual members might create different or even opposite effects when applied collectively.
63
What's the classic stadium example of the Fallacy of Composition?
"If one person stands up at a stadium, they can see better. Therefore, if everyone stands up, everyone will see better." (In reality, if everyone stands, no one gains an advantage)
64
What's a common economic example of this fallacy?
"If one person saves money, they'll be better off financially. Therefore, if everyone saves money at the same time, everyone will be better off." (This ignores that mass saving can lead to economic slowdown)
65
How can you recognize the Fallacy of Composition?
Look for:
- Arguments that jump from individual to collective benefits
- Assumptions about scaling effects
- Ignoring system-level interactions
- Overlooking emergent properties
66
What is the Fallacy of Division?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly concludes that what's true for the whole must also be true for its individual parts or members.
67
How is the Fallacy of Division different from the Fallacy of Composition?
Division goes from whole to parts (top-down), while Composition goes from parts to whole (bottom-up). Both are incorrect ways of reasoning.
68
What's a classic example of the Fallacy of Division?
"The United States is the richest country in the world, therefore all Americans must be rich." (This ignores wealth distribution and individual circumstances)
69
How can you spot the Fallacy of Division?
Look for:
- Arguments that move from whole to parts
- Assumptions about group characteristics applying to individuals
- Ignoring individual variations
- Overlooking distribution patterns
70
In what contexts does this fallacy commonly appear?
- Statistics and averages
- Group characteristics
- Organizational behavior
- Social stereotypes
- Economic analysis
71
What is an Appeal to Emotion fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone tries to win an argument by manipulating emotions instead of providing valid logical reasoning or evidence.
72
What are the main types of emotional appeals used in this fallacy?
- Fear (Appeal to Fear)
- Pity (Appeal to Pity)
- Pride (Appeal to Pride)
- Anger (Appeal to Anger)
- Guilt (Appeal to Guilt)
- Happiness (Appeal to Happiness)
73
How can you recognize an Appeal to Emotion?
Look for:
- Strong emotional language
- Dramatic imagery or stories
- Lack of logical evidence
- Manipulation of feelings
- Pressure to make quick decisions
- Appeal to personal feelings over facts
74
What's a common marketing example of Appeal to Emotion?
"Don't let your family down - buy our life insurance today! Can you imagine how they'd feel if something happened to you?" (Uses guilt and fear instead of discussing policy benefits)
75
How is Appeal to Emotion used in politics?
"A vote for the opposition is a vote against our children's future!" (Uses fear and guilt without addressing actual policies)
76
What is an Appeal to Moderation fallacy?
A logical fallacy that assumes the middle ground or compromise between two positions is always the correct answer, regardless of the evidence or merit of either position.
77
How can you recognize an Appeal to Moderation?
Look for:
- Suggestions that "the truth lies in the middle"
- Automatic compromise proposals
- Dismissal of "extreme" positions
- Assumption that moderation is always wise
- Equal treatment of valid and invalid positions
78
What's the main problem with Appeal to Moderation?
It assumes that the middle ground is always correct, when sometimes one position might be entirely right and another entirely wrong. Truth isn't determined by how moderate a position is.
79
What phrases often signal an Appeal to Moderation?
- "Let's meet in the middle"
- "Both sides are extreme"
- "The truth lies somewhere in between"
- "We need a balanced approach"
- "Neither extreme is right"
80
Give an example of Appeal to Moderation in practice?
If one person says "2+2=4" and another says "2+2=6", the fallacy would suggest that "2+2=5" must be correct because it's in the middle, which is clearly wrong.
81
What is a Definitional Fallacy?
A logical error that occurs when someone misuses definitions, changes them mid-argument, or manipulates them to support their conclusion rather than using consistent, accepted meanings.
82
What are the main types of Definitional Fallacies?
- Equivocation (using multiple meanings of a word)
- No True Scotsman (changing definitions to exclude counterexamples)
- Persuasive Definition (loaded or biased definitions)
- Definist Fallacy (defining something in terms of what you want to prove)
83
How can you recognize a Definitional Fallacy?
Look for:
- Shifting meanings of terms within an argument
- Unusual or non-standard definitions
- Definitions that seem crafted to win the argument
- Terms used inconsistently
- Circular definitions
84
What's a classic example of Definitional Fallacy?
"No true vegetarian would eat fish. Sarah eats fish but claims to be vegetarian, therefore she's not really a vegetarian." (This is a No True Scotsman variation, arbitrarily redefining "vegetarian")
85
How can you prevent Definitional Fallacies in your own arguments?
- Define terms clearly at the start
- Use standard, accepted definitions
- Maintain consistent usage throughout
- Acknowledge when terms have multiple meanings
- Be precise in language choice
86
What is an Ambiguity Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where an argument uses words or phrases that can be interpreted in multiple ways, leading to confusion or invalid conclusions due to the shifting meanings.
87
What are the main types of Ambiguity Fallacies?
- Semantic Ambiguity (words with multiple meanings)
- Syntactic Ambiguity (unclear sentence structure)
- Scope Ambiguity (unclear what terms modify)
- Referential Ambiguity (unclear what pronouns refer to)
88
How can you spot an Ambiguity Fallacy?
Look for:
- Words used with multiple meanings
- Unclear pronoun references
- Confusing sentence structures
- Double meanings
- Statements that could be interpreted multiple ways
89
What's a classic example of Ambiguity Fallacy?
"All stars are in the sky. Movie stars are stars. Therefore, all movie stars are in the sky." (The word "star" is used with two different meanings)
90
How can you prevent Ambiguity Fallacies?
- Define terms clearly
- Use precise language
- Maintain consistent meanings
- Clarify pronouns
- Structure sentences carefully
91
What is an Argument from Incredulity?
A logical fallacy where someone rejects or accepts an argument simply because they personally find it difficult to understand or believe, rather than based on actual evidence.
92
What are the two main forms of Argument from Incredulity?
- Negative: "I can't understand it, so it must be false"
- Positive: "I can't imagine it being false, so it must be true"
93
What phrases often signal an Argument from Incredulity?
- "I can't believe that..."
- "It's impossible to imagine..."
- "How could that possibly be true?"
- "It's just common sense that..."
- "There's no way that..."
94
Give an example of this fallacy in science?
"I can't understand how evolution could create such complex organisms, therefore it must be false." (Personal inability to understand doesn't make something false)
95
How can you counter an Argument from Incredulity?
- Ask for specific evidence
- Point out that personal understanding isn't a measure of truth
- Provide concrete examples
- Explain that complexity doesn't equal impossibility
- Share analogies to help understanding
96
What is the Divine Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone attributes a phenomenon to divine or supernatural causes simply because it is complex, beautiful, or difficult to explain through natural means.
97
What are common indicators of the Divine Fallacy?
- "It's too perfect to be natural"
- "Only God could create something this complex"
- "This can't be explained by science"
- "It must be supernatural because it's so amazing"
- "There's no way this happened by chance"
98
What are some typical examples of Divine Fallacy?
- Claiming DNA is too complex to have evolved naturally
- Attributing beautiful natural phenomena to supernatural design
- Arguing consciousness must be divine because it's mysterious
- Suggesting mathematical principles prove divine creation
99
How has the Divine Fallacy influenced history?
Throughout history, natural phenomena like earthquakes, eclipses, and diseases were often attributed to divine causes until scientific explanations were discovered and understood.
100
How can you counter the Divine Fallacy?
- Explain that complexity doesn't imply supernatural causes
- Provide scientific explanations
- Show examples of natural complexity
- Demonstrate evolutionary processes
- Point out historical examples where natural explanations replaced supernatural ones
101
What is the "If by Whiskey" fallacy?
A rhetorical technique where a speaker appears to take both sides of an argument simultaneously by using emotionally charged language to describe the same subject in both positive and negative terms.
102
Where does the name "If by Whiskey" come from?
It comes from a 1952 speech by Mississippi legislator Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat Jr. about prohibition, where he eloquently argued both for and against whiskey using emotional appeals.
103
What is the typical structure of an "If by Whiskey" argument?
- "If by [X] you mean..." (positive attributes)
- "But if by [X] you mean..." (negative attributes)
- Both descriptions refer to the same thing
- Uses emotionally charged language
- Avoids taking a clear stance
104
How can you identify an "If by Whiskey" argument?
- Dual opposing descriptions
- Heavy use of emotional language
- Seemingly contradictory positions
- Ambiguous conclusion
- Appeals to different audiences simultaneously
105
What was Sweat's original "If by Whiskey" speech about?
He described whiskey both as "the devil's brew" that causes misery and as "the philosophical wine" that brings joy, effectively speaking to both prohibitionists and anti-prohibitionists without taking a clear stance.
106
What is a Complete Comparison fallacy?
A logical error where comparisons are made without specifying what is being compared, or when important aspects of the comparison are omitted to make one thing appear better or worse.
107
What are the key elements to look for in a Complete Comparison fallacy?
- Missing comparison criteria
- Omitted relevant differences
- Unstated assumptions
- Incomplete context
- Selective information
108
What are some everyday examples of Complete Comparison fallacy?
- "This car is better." (Better in what way?)
- "Product X is superior to Product Y." (In what aspects?)
- "Living in cities is worse." (Worse than what? In what ways?)
- "Our service is improved." (Compared to what? How?)
109
How can you avoid making Complete Comparison fallacies?
- Specify exact criteria being compared
- Include relevant context
- Acknowledge limitations
- Consider all important factors
- Use measurable metrics when possible
110
What phrases often signal a Complete Comparison fallacy?
"Better than..."
- "Superior to..."
- "Worse than..."
- "Improved..."
- Any comparison without specific criteria
111
What is an Instant Comparison fallacy?
A logical error where someone draws conclusions based on quick, superficial similarities between two things while ignoring crucial differences that make the comparison invalid.
112
What are the main characteristics of Instant Comparison?
- Quick, surface-level comparisons
- Ignoring crucial differences
- Oversimplified conclusions
- Emotional rather than logical basis
- Lack of deeper analysis
113
What are some typical examples of Instant Comparison?
- "Running a country is just like running a business"
- "The human brain is exactly like a computer"
- "Raising children is just like training pets"
- "The economy is like a household budget"
114
What phrases often signal an Instant Comparison fallacy?
- "It's just like..."
- "It's the same as..."
- "If X can do it, why can't Y?"
- "It's no different than..."
- "Think of it as..."
115
How can you avoid making Instant Comparison fallacies?
- Analyze deeper relationships
- Consider context and complexity
- Identify crucial differences
- Question surface similarities
- Take time for thorough comparison
116
What is the Proof by Repetition fallacy?
A logical error where a claim is considered true simply because it has been repeated many times, rather than because of actual evidence or logical reasoning.
117
Why does Proof by Repetition often work psychologically?
- Familiarity breeds acceptance
- Repeated exposure increases believability
- Memory becomes stronger with repetition
- People confuse familiarity with truth
- Cognitive ease increases with exposure
118
Where is Proof by Repetition commonly used?
- Advertising and marketing
- Political campaigns
- Propaganda
- Social media
- Conspiracy theories
- Brand messaging
119
What are the indicators of Proof by Repetition?
- Constant repetition of claims
- Lack of supporting evidence
- Emotional rather than logical appeals
- Simplified slogans or catchphrases
- Resistance to questioning or verification
120
How can you protect yourself against Proof by Repetition?
- Always ask for evidence
- Question repeated claims
- Look for original sources
- Evaluate logical arguments
- Consider alternative viewpoints
121
What is the Mind Projection Fallacy?
The error of confusing the properties of your mental models with properties of the real world, assuming that the way you think about something is the way it actually exists in reality.
122
What are the main signs of Mind Projection Fallacy?
- Treating mental models as reality
- Confusing maps with territories
- Assuming personal perception equals truth
- Mistaking subjective for objective
- Projecting human concepts onto nature
123
What are some everyday examples of Mind Projection Fallacy?
- "Time flows like a river" (projecting human experience onto time)
- "Nature abhors a vacuum" (attributing human preferences to nature)
- "The market wants..." (treating abstractions as real entities)
- "Numbers exist in reality" (confusing mathematical models with reality)
124
How can you avoid the Mind Projection Fallacy?
- Recognize models as tools, not reality
- Distinguish map from territory
- Question assumptions about "natural" or "obvious" truths
- Consider multiple perspectives
- Acknowledge subjective elements in thinking
125
Who identified the Mind Projection Fallacy and why is it important?
E.T. Jaynes identified it in physics, showing how scientists sometimes confused their mathematical models with physical reality. It's important because it helps us distinguish between our mental constructs and objective reality.
126
What is the "Proving Too Much" fallacy?
A logical error where an argument, if accepted, would prove not only the intended conclusion but also other conclusions that are clearly false or unacceptable, indicating the original argument is flawed.
127
How can you identify when an argument "proves too much"?
- Apply the same logic to similar situations
- Check if it leads to absurd conclusions
- Test if it proves known falsehoods
- See if it contradicts accepted truths
- Examine if it undermines itself
128
What is the typical structure of a "Proving Too Much" argument?
1. Argument made for specific case
2. Same logic applied to other cases
3. Results in absurd conclusions
4. Therefore, original argument is flawed
5. Need different reasoning
129
How can you avoid making "Proving Too Much" arguments?
- Test arguments with similar cases
- Consider broader implications
- Look for counterexamples
- Check for logical consistency
- Refine argument scope
130
What's a classic example of "Proving Too Much"?
"We should ban violent video games because they contain fictional violence. By this logic, we should also ban books, movies, and fairy tales that contain any violence - which is clearly absurd."
131
What is the False Authority fallacy?
A logical error where an argument relies on the opinion of an "expert" who either lacks relevant expertise in the specific field or whose expertise is irrelevant to the claim being made.
132
What are the main signs of False Authority?
- Expert speaking outside their field
- Celebrity endorsements as expertise
- Irrelevant credentials
- Mismatched qualifications
- Appeal to tradition or position
133
What are typical examples of False Authority?
- Actors promoting medical products
- Athletes endorsing financial services
- Religious leaders speaking on scientific matters
- Business leaders opining on climate science
- Celebrity diet advice
134
How can you distinguish valid from false authority?
- Valid: Expert has relevant credentials
- Valid: Speaking within their field
- Valid: Claims supported by evidence
- Invalid: Speaking outside expertise
- Invalid: Relying solely on reputation
135
How can you avoid being misled by False Authority?
- Check relevant credentials
- Verify expertise in specific field
- Look for supporting evidence
- Consider multiple expert opinions
- Evaluate arguments on merit
136
What is the Appeal to Authority fallacy?
A logical error where something is claimed to be true solely because an authority figure (even a legitimate expert) says it is, without providing supporting evidence or acknowledging potential disagreement among experts.
137
When is citing an authority legitimate vs. fallacious?
Legitimate:
- Cites evidence and reasoning
- Acknowledges uncertainty
- References consensus
- Open to scrutiny
Fallacious:
- Relies solely on reputation
- Ignores contradicting evidence
- Dismisses valid criticism
- Claims absolute certainty
138
Why can't we always trust expert opinion alone?
- Experts can disagree
- Science evolves
- Bias exists
- Evidence matters more than authority
- Consensus may change
139
When is it appropriate to cite authority?
- When supported by evidence
- When representing consensus
- When acknowledging limitations
- When open to verification
- When expertise is directly relevant
140
How can you avoid making Appeal to Authority arguments?
- Focus on evidence over credentials
- Consider multiple viewpoints
- Acknowledge uncertainty
- Look for consensus
- Evaluate reasoning independently
141
What is a False Dilemma fallacy?
A logical error that reduces a complex situation to only two options when more alternatives exist. It forces a choice between two extremes while ignoring middle ground or other possibilities.
142
What are typical patterns of False Dilemma arguments?
- Either/or statements
- All or nothing thinking
- With us or against us
- Perfect or worthless
- Success or failure only
143
How can you identify a False Dilemma?
- Look for oversimplified choices
- Check for ignored alternatives
- Spot extreme positions
- Notice missing middle ground
- Identify forced choices
144
What are some common examples of False Dilemma?
- "Either you go to college or you'll be a failure"
- "You're either with us or against us"
- "Love it or leave it"
- "Buy now or miss out forever"
- "Either support this policy or you don't care about safety"
145
How can you avoid False Dilemma thinking?
- Consider multiple options
- Look for middle ground
- Recognize complexity
- Question binary choices
- Explore alternatives
146
What is False Equivalence?
A logical fallacy where two different things are incorrectly presented as equivalent or comparable, despite having fundamental differences that make the comparison invalid or misleading.
147
What are the main signs of False Equivalence?
- Superficial similarities emphasized
- Important differences ignored
- False balance created
- Oversimplified comparisons
- Mismatched scale or severity
148
What are typical examples of False Equivalence?
- Comparing minor mistakes to major offenses
- Equating opinion with expertise
- Treating correlation as causation
- Comparing unrelated statistics
- Equating different scales of problems
149
How can you identify False Equivalence?
- Check for context differences
- Compare severity levels
- Examine underlying principles
- Assess scale appropriately
- Look for false balance
150
How can you avoid making False Equivalence arguments?
- Consider context carefully
- Acknowledge differences
- Compare appropriate scales
- Recognize complexity
- Maintain proper perspective
151
What is the Historian's Fallacy?
A logical error where we criticize historical figures or past decisions using knowledge that wasn't available to them at the time, failing to account for the limited information and context they had.
152
What are the main components of the Historian's Fallacy?
- Hindsight bias
- Present-day perspective
- Knowledge asymmetry
- Temporal context
- Outcome bias
153
How can you identify the Historian's Fallacy?
- Criticism based on outcomes unknown at the time
- Using modern standards to judge past actions
- Assuming past knowledge of future events
- Ignoring historical context and limitations
- Overlooking period-specific constraints
154
What are typical examples of the Historian's Fallacy?
- "They should have seen the war coming"
- "Why didn't they prevent the economic crisis?"
- "How could they not realize the consequences?"
- "It was obvious what would happen"
- "They should have known better"
155
How can you avoid the Historian's Fallacy?
- Consider contemporary knowledge
- Examine available information
- Understand period constraints
- Account for uncertainty
- Recognize limited perspectives
156
What is a Syllogistic Fallacy?
A logical error in deductive reasoning where the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the premises, even when the premises themselves are true. It's a breakdown in the logical structure of a syllogism.
157
What are the three parts of a syllogism?
- Major Premise (General statement)
- Minor Premise (Specific instance)
- Conclusion (Logical result)
158
What are the main types of Syllogistic Fallacies?
1. Undistributed Middle
2. Illicit Major
3. Illicit Minor
4. Fallacy of Four Terms
5. Fallacy of Exclusive Premises
6. Fallacy of Two Negative Premises
159
How can you tell if a syllogism is valid?
- Terms must be used consistently
- At least one premise must be positive
- Middle term must be distributed at least once
- Terms in conclusion can't be broader than in premise
160
What's an example of a syllogistic fallacy?
Invalid:
- All cats are animals
- All dogs are animals
- Therefore, all cats are dogs
Valid:
- All cats are animals
- All Siamese are cats
- Therefore, all Siamese are animals
161
What is the Appeal to Nature fallacy?
A logical fallacy that assumes something is good or correct simply because it's "natural," or bad because it's "unnatural," without considering actual benefits or harm.
162
Why is Appeal to Nature fallacious?
- Natural things can be harmful (poison, diseases)
- Artificial things can be beneficial (medicine, technology)
- "Natural" is often poorly defined
- Ignores scientific evidence
- Oversimplifies complex issues
163
What are typical examples of Appeal to Nature?
- "Natural medicines are better because they're natural"
- "Processed foods are bad because they're unnatural"
- "Chemical-free products are safer" (everything is chemical)
- "Ancient remedies are better because they're traditional"
- "GMOs are bad because they're not natural"
164
How can you identify an Appeal to Nature?
- Look for "natural = good" arguments
- Watch for "chemical-free" claims
- Notice "traditional is better" reasoning
- Spot rejection of "artificial" solutions
- Identify oversimplified natural/unnatural distinctions
165
How should we evaluate claims instead?
- Consider scientific evidence
- Examine actual benefits and risks
- Look at empirical data
- Evaluate specific effects
- Consider context and application
166
What is the Appeal to Tradition fallacy?
A logical error where something is considered correct or superior simply because it's traditional or has been done for a long time, without evaluating its actual effectiveness or validity.
167
What are the main signs of Appeal to Tradition?
- References to historical precedent
- "We've always done it this way"
- Resistance to change based on tradition
- Dismissal of new methods without evaluation
- Romanticizing the past
168
What are typical examples of Appeal to Tradition?
- "This is how we've always celebrated this holiday"
- "Traditional medicine is better because it's ancient"
- "We shouldn't change our company's processes - they're traditional"
- "This is how my grandmother did it"
- "Old ways are the best ways"
169
How can you respond to Appeal to Tradition?
- Evaluate actual effectiveness
- Consider modern context
- Examine evidence
- Compare alternatives
- Assess current needs
170
What's a better way to evaluate practices?
- Look at empirical evidence
- Consider current context
- Evaluate costs and benefits
- Test effectiveness
- Compare alternatives objectively
171
What is the Appeal to Popularity fallacy?
A logical fallacy that assumes something is true, right, or good simply because many people believe it or do it, rather than based on actual evidence or merit.
172
What are the main signs of Appeal to Popularity?
- References to majority opinion
- "Everyone is doing it"
- Peer pressure arguments
- Trend-based reasoning
- Mass belief justifications
173
What are typical examples of Appeal to Popularity?
- "Most people use this brand, so it must be the best"
- "Everyone believes in this, so it must be true"
- "This is the most downloaded app, so it must be good"
- "All my friends are doing it, so it must be right"
- "Millions of people can't be wrong"
174
What are some historical examples of this fallacy?
- Flat Earth belief in ancient times
- Bloodletting as medical treatment
- Smoking being considered healthy
- Popular but ineffective folk remedies
- Mass market investment bubbles
175
How can you respond to Appeal to Popularity?
- Ask for actual evidence
- Examine independent research
- Consider logical reasoning
- Look for empirical data
- Evaluate merit independently
176
What is the Appeal to Emotion fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone attempts to win an argument by manipulating emotions rather than using valid reasoning or evidence. It exploits feelings instead of facts.
177
What are the main types of emotional appeals?
- Fear (Appeal to Fear)
- Pity (Appeal to Pity)
- Pride (Appeal to Pride)
- Anger (Appeal to Anger)
- Guilt (Appeal to Guilt)
- Happiness (Appeal to Happiness)
178
What are typical examples of Appeal to Emotion?
- "Think of the children!" (without relevant context)
- "Don't you care about [emotional topic]?"
- "Only heartless people would disagree"
- "If you really loved me, you would..."
- "How can you sleep at night if you don't support this?"
179
How can you identify an Appeal to Emotion?
- Strong emotional language
- Dramatic imagery or stories
- Lack of logical evidence
- Guilt-inducing statements
- Manipulation of fears or hopes
- Personal attacks
180
How should we evaluate arguments instead?
- Look for factual evidence
- Examine logical connections
- Consider rational arguments
- Separate emotions from facts
- Ask for concrete proof
181
What is the Appeal to Pity fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone tries to win an argument by making others feel sorry for them or guilty, rather than providing valid reasoning or evidence.
182
What are the main signs of Appeal to Pity?
- Playing the victim
- Emphasizing hardships
- Using guilt trips
- Focusing on personal difficulties
- Highlighting unfortunate circumstances
183
What are typical examples of Appeal to Pity?
- "I worked so hard on this, you have to give me a better grade"
- "Think about my family situation before firing me"
- "You're my last hope, please help me"
- "After all I've done for you..."
- "If you don't help, I don't know what I'll do"
184
How can you identify an Appeal to Pity?
- Focus on personal hardship
- Emotional manipulation
- Guilt-inducing language
- Emphasis on suffering
- Lack of relevant arguments
185
How should we evaluate situations instead?
- Consider merit and facts
- Examine relevant criteria
- Look for logical connections
- Separate emotion from logic
- Focus on actual evidence
186
What is the Appeal to Force fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone tries to win an argument through threats, coercion, or intimidation rather than using valid reasoning or evidence.
187
What are the main signs of Appeal to Force?
- Direct or implied threats
- Power-based arguments
- Intimidation tactics
- Coercive language
- Consequences without logic
188
What are typical examples of Appeal to Force?
- "Agree with me, or you'll regret it"
- "If you don't support this, you might lose your job"
- "Nice business you have here... would be a shame if something happened to it"
- "Do this, or else..."
- "You better agree, or there will be consequences"
189
How can you identify an Appeal to Force?
- Presence of threats
- Power dynamics
- Intimidating language
- Focus on consequences
- Lack of logical arguments
190
How should arguments be made instead?
- Use valid evidence
- Present logical reasoning
- Respect others' rights
- Focus on merit
- Engage in honest debate
191
What is the Appeal to Novelty fallacy?
A logical fallacy where something is assumed to be superior or better simply because it's new, modern, or recent, rather than based on its actual merits or evidence.
192
What are the main signs of Appeal to Novelty?
- Emphasis on newness
- Dismissal of traditional methods
- Focus on modernity
- Assumption of progress
- Rejection of older ideas
193
What are typical examples of Appeal to Novelty?
- "This is the latest technology, so it must be better"
- "That's an old-fashioned way of thinking"
- "Modern methods are always superior"
- "Nobody uses that anymore, this is the future"
- "It's new, so it must be improved"
194
How can you identify an Appeal to Novelty?
- Emphasis on recency
- Dismissal of tradition
- Focus on trends
- Modern bias
- Lack of evidence beyond newness
195
How should we evaluate things instead?
- Examine actual evidence
- Compare effectiveness
- Consider proven results
- Evaluate practical benefits
- Look at track records
196
What is the Appeal to Ignorance fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone claims something must be true because it hasn't been proven false (or false because it hasn't been proven true), rather than providing actual evidence.
197
What are the main signs of Appeal to Ignorance?
- Absence of evidence used as evidence
- Shifting burden of proof
- Claiming truth by default
- Using lack of disproof as proof
- Demanding impossible proof
198
What are typical examples of Appeal to Ignorance?
- "Nobody has proven ghosts don't exist, so they must be real"
- "You can't prove I'm wrong, so I must be right"
- "Science hasn't explained X, so my explanation must be correct"
- "There's no evidence against it, so it must be true"
- "Prove that it's not true!"
199
How can you identify an Appeal to Ignorance?
- Shifting burden of proof
- Lack of evidence cited as evidence
- Demanding negative proof
- Default assumptions
- Absence of counterproof used as proof
200
How should we evaluate claims instead?
- Look for positive evidence
- Consider burden of proof
- Examine available data
- Accept uncertainty when appropriate
- Use proper scientific methods
201
What is the Appeal to Common Practice fallacy?
A logical fallacy where something is considered acceptable or correct simply because it's commonly done or widely practiced, rather than based on its actual merits.
202
What are the main signs of Appeal to Common Practice?
- Reference to widespread behavior
- "Everyone does it" reasoning
- Cultural normalization
- Tradition-based justification
- Peer pressure logic
203
What are typical examples of Appeal to Common Practice?
- "Everyone cheats on their taxes, so it's okay"
- "That's just how things are done here"
- "All the other companies do it this way"
- "It's normal in our culture"
- "Nobody follows that rule anyway"
204
How can you identify an Appeal to Common Practice?
- References to common behavior
- Normalization of actions
- Group behavior justification
- Cultural acceptance claims
- Majority practice arguments
205
How should we evaluate practices instead?
- Examine ethical implications
- Consider actual consequences
- Evaluate individual merits
- Apply moral principles
- Question traditional practices
206
What is the Appeal to Accomplishment fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone's success or achievements in one area are used to justify their claims or opinions in unrelated fields, rather than using relevant evidence or reasoning.
207
What are the main signs of Appeal to Accomplishment?
- Reference to success
- Citing credentials
- Mentioning achievements
- Cross-domain authority claims
- Status-based arguments
208
What are typical examples of Appeal to Accomplishment?
- "He's a successful businessman, so his political views must be right"
- "She won an Oscar, so her opinions on science matter"
- "They're rich, so they must know about economics"
- "As a famous athlete, their health advice must be good"
- "They're successful, so they must be right about everything"
209
How can you identify an Appeal to Accomplishment?
- Success used as expertise proof
- Achievements in unrelated fields
- Status as authority marker
- Wealth as wisdom indicator
- Fame as knowledge proof
210
How should we evaluate claims instead?
- Look for relevant expertise
- Examine specific evidence
- Consider domain knowledge
- Verify credentials in field
- Focus on argument merit
211
What is the Appeal to Money fallacy?
A logical fallacy where something is assumed to be better, more truthful, or more valuable simply because it's expensive or associated with wealth, rather than based on actual evidence or quality.
212
What are the main signs of Appeal to Money?
- Price-based judgment
- Wealth association
- Cost comparison
- Financial status emphasis
- Monetary value focus
213
What are typical examples of Appeal to Money?
- "This medicine is more expensive, so it must work better"
- "They're rich, so their advice must be valuable"
- "The expensive school must provide better education"
- "If it costs more, it must be higher quality"
- "Premium prices mean premium products"
214
How can you identify an Appeal to Money?
- Price comparisons as proof
- Wealth as credibility marker
- Cost-based assumptions
- Financial status references
- Monetary value emphasis
215
How should we evaluate things instead?
- Examine actual quality
- Look for evidence
- Consider performance data
- Check independent reviews
- Assess real value
216
What's the difference between correlation and causation?
Correlation means two variables are related or change together, while causation means one variable directly causes changes in the other. Just because things are correlated doesn't mean one causes the other.
217
What are the main features of correlation?
- Shows relationship between variables
- Can be positive or negative
- Measured from -1 to +1
- Doesn't indicate causation
- Can be coincidental
218
How can we establish causation?
- Controlled experiments
- Temporal sequence (cause precedes effect)
- Ruling out alternative explanations
- Consistent and repeatable results
- Plausible mechanism of action
219
What are common mistakes in correlation/causation?
- Assuming correlation means causation
- Ignoring third variables
- Reversing cause and effect
- Overlooking coincidence
- Making hasty conclusions
220
How does science address correlation vs. causation?
- Uses controlled experiments
- Tests hypotheses
- Accounts for variables
- Requires replication
- Seeks mechanisms
221
What is the Complex Cause fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone oversimplifies a complicated situation by attributing an outcome to just one cause when multiple factors are actually involved.
222
What are the main signs of Complex Cause fallacy?
- Oversimplification of causes
- Ignoring multiple factors
- Single-cause explanation
- Dismissal of complexity
- Reductionist thinking
223
What are typical examples of Complex Cause fallacy?
- "Crime increased because of video games"
- "The economy crashed due to one policy"
- "Students fail just because they're lazy"
- "Obesity is solely due to lack of willpower"
- "Depression is just chemical imbalance"
224
How can you identify Complex Cause fallacy?
- Single factor emphasis
- Ignoring context
- Oversimplified solutions
- Dismissal of other factors
- "Just because" reasoning
225
How should we analyze causes instead?
- Consider multiple factors
- Examine interactions
- Look for patterns
- Study context
- Research various influences
226
What is the Single Cause fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone assumes there must be exactly one cause for an outcome, refusing to accept that different independent causes could produce the same result.
227
What are the main signs of Single Cause fallacy?
- Insistence on one cause
- Rejection of alternatives
- "Either/or" thinking
- Cause hunting
- Alternative dismissal
228
What are typical examples of Single Cause fallacy?
- There must be one reason for the headache"
- "What's THE cause of inflation?"
- "We need to find THE source of the problem"
- "What's THE reason for climate change?"
- "There has to be one explanation
229
How can you identify Single Cause fallacy?
- Looking for "the" cause
- Dismissing multiple possibilities
- Insisting on single explanation
- Refusing alternative causes
- "Must be one reason" thinking
230
How should we approach causation instead?
- Accept multiple possibilities
- Consider independent causes
- Evaluate alternatives
- Recognize parallel causes
- Allow for uncertainty
231
What is the Wrong Direction fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone confuses cause and effect, or incorrectly assumes that because event A follows event B, B must have caused A.
232
What are the main signs of Wrong Direction fallacy?
- Reversed causation
- Timeline confusion
- Correlation misinterpretation
- Direction assumption
- Sequence misunderstanding
233
What are typical examples of Wrong Direction fallacy?
- "People are happy because they smile"
- "Streets are wet, so it must have rained"
- "Crime rates are up because we hired more police"
- "Ice cream sales cause summer weather"
- "Medicine caused recovery (when actually preventive)"
234
How can you identify Wrong Direction fallacy?
- Check temporal sequence
- Question direction
- Examine relationships
- Consider alternatives
- Look for actual mechanisms
235
How should we analyze cause-effect relationships?
- Establish clear timeline
- Identify mechanisms
- Test both directions
- Consider third variables
- Verify causation
236
What are Relevance Fallacies?
Logical errors where the arguments or evidence presented don't actually support the conclusion, even though they might seem persuasive. They often rely on irrelevant information or emotional appeals.
237
What are the main types of Relevance Fallacies?
- Ad Hominem (attacking the person)
- Appeal to Emotion
- Red Herring (diversion)
- Appeal to Authority
- Genetic Fallacy
- Bandwagon Fallacy
238
How can you identify Relevance Fallacies?
- Check if arguments address the actual issue
- Look for emotional manipulation
- Identify personal attacks
- Spot topic diversions
- Notice irrelevant appeals
239
What are some examples of Relevance Fallacies?
- "He's wrong because he's young" (Ad Hominem)
- "Think of the children!" (Appeal to Emotion)
- "But what about..." (Red Herring)
- "Famous person X believes it" (Appeal to Authority)
- "Everyone's doing it" (Bandwagon)
240
How can we avoid Relevance Fallacies?
- Focus on the actual argument
- Evaluate evidence objectively
- Ignore personal characteristics
- Stay on topic
- Question relevance
241
What is an Ad Hominem fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone attacks the person making an argument rather than addressing the actual argument or evidence they present.
242
What are the main types of Ad Hominem attacks?
- Personal Attack (direct insults)
- Circumstantial (attacking circumstances)
- Tu Quoque ("you too" fallacy)
- Guilt by Association
- Poisoning the Well
243
How can you identify Ad Hominem attacks?
- Focus on personal characteristics
- Character attacks
- Background criticism
- Circumstance emphasis
- Association attacks
244
What are typical examples of Ad Hominem?
- "You're too young to understand this"
- "She's rich, so she can't speak about poverty"
- "You did the same thing last year!"
- "He's uneducated, so he must be wrong"
- "What do you know? You're not from here"
245
What is the Genetic Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone accepts or rejects an argument based solely on its origin, source, or history rather than evaluating its current merit or validity.
246
What are the main signs of Genetic Fallacy?
- Focus on origin
- Source-based judgment
- Historical emphasis
- Background fixation
- Origin-based dismissal
247
What are typical examples of Genetic Fallacy?
- "It's an old idea, so it must be outdated"
- "That theory came from a bad person"
- "It's from a different culture, so it's wrong"
- "That company started badly, so their products are bad"
- "It originated in marketing, so it can't be true"
248
How can you identify Genetic Fallacy?
- Source emphasis over content
- Historical focus over current merit
- Origin-based rejection
- Background-based acceptance
- Source-based prejudice
249
How should we evaluate arguments instead?
- Examine current evidence
- Evaluate present merit
- Consider actual content
- Assess logical validity
- Test practical application
250
What is the Tu Quoque fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone deflects criticism by pointing out that the critic is also guilty of the same behavior, rather than addressing the actual argument.
251
What are the main signs of Tu Quoque?
- Deflection of criticism
- Pointing out hypocrisy
- "You too" responses
- Focus on inconsistency
- Avoiding the actual argument
252
What are typical examples of Tu Quoque?
- "How can you criticize my driving when you got a ticket last month?"
- "You say I should quit smoking, but you used to smoke!"
- "Why should I listen to your advice about saving money when you're in debt?"
- "You're criticizing my lateness? You were late last week!"
253
How can you identify Tu Quoque arguments?
- Deflection to critic's behavior
- "You too" statements
- Hypocrisy accusations
- Past behavior references
- Inconsistency focus.
254
How should we respond to Tu Quoque arguments?
- Address the actual argument
- Focus on present merit
- Acknowledge past without deflecting
- Evaluate evidence independently
- Stay on current topic
255
What is the Guilt by Association fallacy?
A logical error where something or someone is considered bad or wrong simply because of their connection to something else that is viewed negatively, without evaluating actual merit.
256
What are the main signs of Guilt by Association?
- Connection-based judgment
- Group association criticism
- Relationship-based rejection
- Assumed shared qualities
- Transfer of negative traits
257
What are typical examples of Guilt by Association?
- "He's friends with bad people, so he must be bad too"
- "That company once worked with a corrupt firm, so they're corrupt"
- "She went to that controversial school, so her ideas are wrong"
- "They use the same methods as [negative group], so they're evil"
258
How can you identify Guilt by Association?
- Look for connection emphasis
- Notice group stereotyping
- Identify relationship focus
- Spot transferred blame
- Watch for guilt assumptions
259
How should we evaluate instead of using Guilt by Association?
- Judge on individual merit
- Examine actual evidence
- Consider direct actions
- Evaluate specific behavior
- Assess independent qualities
260
What is the Middle Ground Fallacy?
A logical error where someone assumes that the truth or best solution must lie somewhere between two extreme positions, regardless of the actual facts or evidence.
261
What are the main signs of Middle Ground Fallacy?
- Compromise assumption
- Balance preference
- Extreme avoidance
- Middle position bias
- Moderation emphasis
262
What are typical examples of Middle Ground Fallacy?
- "One person says 2+2=4, another says 2+2=6, so it must be 5"
- "Some say climate change is a crisis, others deny it exists, so the truth is probably mild"
- "If one person wants to walk 10 miles and another 0, walking 5 must be right"
- "Between complete freedom and total control, partial control must be best"
263
How can you identify Middle Ground Fallacy?
- Looking for automatic compromise
- Spotting "middle way" assumptions
- Noticing balance bias
- Identifying moderation without evidence
- Observing compromise without merit
264
How should we evaluate instead of assuming middle ground?
- Examine actual evidence
- Consider each position independently
- Look for factual support
- Evaluate merit of each claim
- Base conclusions on data
265
What is False Equivalence?
A logical fallacy where two different things are incorrectly presented as equivalent based on superficial similarities while ignoring crucial differences.
266
What are the main signs of False Equivalence?
- Superficial comparisons
- Ignored key differences
- Oversimplified analogies
- Mismatched scale/scope
- Inappropriate parallels
267
What are typical examples of False Equivalence?
- "Both sides make mistakes, so both sides are equally wrong"
- "Riding a bicycle without a helmet is just like driving without a seatbelt"
- "Having a cold is basically the same as having the flu"
- "Being sad is the same as having clinical depression"
268
How can you identify False Equivalence?
- Look for oversimplified comparisons
- Check for ignored context
- Spot scale differences
- Notice missing nuances
- Identify false parallels
269
How should we evaluate comparisons properly?
- Consider crucial differences
- Examine specific contexts
- Analyze scale and scope
- Evaluate unique features
- Account for complexity
270
What is the Fallacy of Composition?
A logical fallacy where someone incorrectly assumes that what applies to the individual parts of something must also apply to the whole, without proper justification.
271
What are the main signs of Fallacy of Composition?
- Part-to-whole assumptions
- Individual-to-group generalizations
- Element-to-system conclusions
- Component-based reasoning
- Collective attribution errors
272
What are typical examples of Fallacy of Composition?
- "Each player on the team is excellent, so the team must be excellent"
- "Every part of this machine is light, so the machine must be light"
- "Each brick is small, so the wall must be small"
- "Each person in the crowd can see well, so the crowd can see well"
273
How can you identify Fallacy of Composition?
- Look for part-to-whole reasoning
- Check for individual-to-group assumptions
- Spot element-based conclusions
- Notice collective generalizations
- Identify component-based logic
274
How should we evaluate part-whole relationships properly?
- Consider emergent properties
- Examine system interactions
- Analyze collective behavior
- Study whole-system effects
- Evaluate aggregate impact
275
What are Statistical Fallacies?
Errors in reasoning that involve misunderstanding, misusing, or drawing incorrect conclusions from statistical data and probability concepts.
276
What are the main types of Statistical Fallacies?
- Base Rate Fallacy
- Sampling Bias
- Correlation vs. Causation
- Cherry Picking
- Regression to the Mean
- Gambler's Fallacy
277
What is the Base Rate Fallacy?
Ignoring the underlying probability of an event and focusing only on specific information related to the individual case.
278
What is the Correlation vs. Causation Fallacy?
Assuming that because two variables are correlated, one must cause the other, without considering other factors or possibilities.
279
What is Sampling Bias?
Drawing conclusions about a population from a sample that isn't truly representative of that population.
280
What is Hasty Generalization?
A logical fallacy where someone makes a broad conclusion about an entire group or situation based on too little evidence or an unrepresentative sample.
281
What are the main signs of Hasty Generalization?
- Small sample size
- Limited evidence
- Quick conclusions
- Broad statements
- Insufficient data
282
What are typical examples of Hasty Generalization?
- "I met two rude people from City X, so everyone there must be rude"
- "My first attempt failed, so I'll never succeed"
- "One bad meal at a restaurant means it's always terrible"
- "It rained on Monday, so it must rain every Monday"
283
How can you identify Hasty Generalization?
- Look for broad conclusions
- Check sample size
- Examine evidence quality
- Consider time frame
- Assess representativeness
284
How can we avoid making Hasty Generalizations?
- Gather more evidence
- Consider larger samples
- Look for patterns
- Seek diverse perspectives
- Allow for exceptions
285
What is a Biased Sample fallacy?
A logical error where conclusions are drawn from a sample that doesn't properly represent the whole population being studied, leading to inaccurate results.
286
What are the main types of sampling bias?
- Self-selection bias
- Convenience sampling
- Voluntary response bias
- Survivorship bias
- Undercoverage bias
287
How can you identify a biased sample?
- Unrepresentative demographics
- Limited access to population
- Voluntary participation only
- Excluded groups
- Convenience-based selection
288
What are typical examples of biased sampling?
- Online polls (only internet users respond)
- Mall surveys (only shoppers included)
- College campus studies (only students)
- Customer reviews (mostly very satisfied or very dissatisfied)
289
How can we avoid biased sampling?
- Use random sampling
- Include diverse groups
- Consider all demographics
- Account for non-responses
- Use multiple sampling methods
290
What is the Small Sample fallacy?
A logical error where conclusions about a large population are drawn from a sample that's too small to be statistically meaningful or reliable.
291
What are the main problems with small samples?
- High variability
- Low reliability
- Poor representation
- Random fluctuations
- Misleading patterns
292
How can you identify a small sample problem?
- Few data points
- Limited observations
- Quick conclusions
- Extreme results
- High variance
293
How does sample size affect statistical reliability?
- Larger margin of error
- Less confidence in results
- More random variation
- Less representative
- Less predictive power
294
How can we avoid small sample problems?
- Increase sample size
- Use power analysis
- Consider variation
- Multiple samples
- Statistical validation
295
What is the Regression Fallacy?
A logical error where someone attributes cause to natural statistical fluctuations, failing to recognize that extreme values tend to naturally move toward the average over time.
296
What is "Regression to the Mean"?
The statistical phenomenon where extreme measurements tend to be followed by more moderate ones, moving closer to the average naturally without any external cause.
297
What are typical examples of Regression Fallacy?
- Sports "sophomore slump"
- Investment performance changes
- Academic performance fluctuations
- Weather pattern changes
- Medical symptom variations
298
How can you identify a Regression Fallacy?
- Extreme initial measurements
- Attribution of causes to natural changes
- Ignoring average tendencies
- Overemphasis on short-term changes
- Failure to consider normal variation
299
How can we avoid Regression Fallacy?
- Consider long-term averages
- Look for natural variation patterns
- Use multiple measurements
- Account for random fluctuation
- Avoid quick causal attribution
300
What is the Gambler's Fallacy?
The incorrect belief that past random events affect future random events, such as thinking that after several heads in a coin toss, tails is "due" to appear.
301
What is the main misconception in Gambler's Fallacy?
The belief that random events are connected or dependent on each other when they are actually independent.
302
What are typical examples of Gambler's Fallacy?
- Believing a roulette number is "due"
- Thinking lottery numbers that haven't appeared are more likely
- Expecting a "streak" to end
- Believing in "hot" or "cold" slots
- Thinking past losses increase future win chances
303
How can you identify Gambler's Fallacy?
- Predictions based on past outcomes
- "Due for" statements
- Belief in "hot" or "cold" streaks
- Pattern-seeking in random events
- Betting strategies based on previous results
304
How can we avoid Gambler's Fallacy?
- Remember each event is independent
- Understand probability basics
- Avoid pattern-seeking in randomness
- Consider each event separately
- Focus on current probability only
305
What is the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy?
A logical fallacy where someone cherry-picks data clusters or patterns after the fact, while ignoring the larger context and scattered data that doesn't fit their desired pattern.
306
What are the two main components of this fallacy?
1. Clustering: Finding patterns in random data
2. Post-hoc boundary drawing: Creating boundaries after seeing the results
307
Where do we commonly see the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy?
- Medical studies cherry-picking results
- Stock market "expert" predictions
- Conspiracy theories
- Horoscope interpretations
- Cancer cluster investigations
308
How can you identify the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy?
- Post-hoc pattern identification
- Ignored contradictory data
- Selective data presentation
- Arbitrary boundaries
- Confirmation bias in data selection
309
How can we avoid the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy?
- Consider all available data
- Define criteria before analysis
- Look for contradictory evidence
- Establish boundaries beforehand
- Use proper statistical methods
310
What is Survivorship Bias?
The tendency to focus on successful examples while ignoring failures, leading to skewed perspectives and false conclusions about what leads to success.
311
What's the famous World War II example of Survivorship Bias?
Military analysts initially wanted to add armor where returning planes had bullet holes, until statistician Abraham Wald pointed out they should protect the areas where surviving planes weren't damaged - because planes hit in those areas didn't make it back.
312
Where do we commonly see Survivorship Bias?
- Business success stories
- Investment strategies
- Self-help advice
- Career paths
- Product reviews
- Historical artifacts
313
How can you identify Survivorship Bias?
- Success-only stories
- Missing failure data
- "Winner" focused analysis
- Incomplete historical records
- Overlooked dropouts/failures
314
How can we avoid Survivorship Bias?
- Look for missing data
- Study failures too
- Ask about dropouts
- Consider complete populations
- Seek counter-examples
315
What is Anecdotal Evidence?
Personal stories, experiences, or isolated examples used to support a claim while ignoring more comprehensive scientific data or statistical evidence.
316
Why is relying on anecdotal evidence problematic?
- Small sample size
- Personal bias
- Lack of controlled conditions
- Ignores contradictory evidence
- Not representative of larger populations
317
What are common situations where people use anecdotal evidence?
- Medical claims ("My grandmother smoked and lived to 95")
- Product effectiveness ("It worked for me!")
- Diet advice ("I lost weight eating only bananas")
- Weather patterns ("It's cold today, so global warming isn't real")
- Educational methods ("I learned this way, and I turned out fine")
318
How can you identify anecdotal evidence?
- Starts with "I know someone who..."
- Based on personal experience
- Single case examples
- Emotional stories
- Lacks statistical support
319
What should we use instead of anecdotal evidence?
- Scientific studies
- Large sample sizes
- Controlled experiments
- Statistical analysis
- Peer-reviewed research
