Flaw in Reasoning Flashcards
What Flaw? “takes the beliefs of one scientist to represent the belief of all scientists.”
Error of Composition
Evidence Flaw: Exceptional Case / Overgeneralization
This is when the author uses a small number of instances to support a very broad and sweeping conclusion. Example: “Two of my friends were shortchanged at the store. Therefore, everyone gets shortchanged at the store.”
Flaw: Error of Division
When the author attributes a characteristic of the whole (or each member of the whole) to a part of the group.” Ex: “The United States is the wealthiest country in the world. Thus, every American is wealthy.”
What Flaw? “depending on ambiguous use of a key term.”
Uncertain use of a Term / Concept
What Flaw? “the argument improperly appeals to the authority of the supervisor.”
Appeal to Authority
What Flaw? “The author draws a conclusion that is not warranted by the evidence provided.”
General Lack of Evidence
What Flaw? “The author argues circularly by assuming the conclusion is true in stating the premises.”
Circular Reasoning
What Flaw? “attempts to persuade by making an emotional appeal.”
Appeal to Emotion
What Flaw? “confusing the coincidence of two events with a causal relation between the two.”
Mistaken Cause and Effect (Correlation)
Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion
Using emotionally charged language to persuade the reader. Example: “Please don’t throw my son in jail! He has had a hard time in school, and has ADHD, and has a baby on the way with his 16 year old girlfriend. He doesn’t deserve jail time!”
What Flaw? “Assumes that legislation should not be supported based on the character of some supporters of the legislation.”
Source Argument
Evidence Flaw: Internal Contradiction
The premise and conclusion contradict one another. Example: “Everyone should join our country club. After all, it’s an exclusive group that links many of the influential members of the community.” Flaw: Conclusion states that ‘everyone’ should join. Premise states that the group is ‘exclusive’. Clearly everyone cannot join an exclusive group.
What Flaw? “assumes a causal relationship where only a correlation has been indicated.”
Mistaken Cause and Effect (Correlation)
Flaw: False Analogy
“occurs when the author uses an analogy that is too dissimilar to the original situation to be applicable.” Ex: “Just as heavy rainfall can be cleansing, the best approach to maintain a healthy relationship is to store up all your petty grievances and then unload them all at one time on your partner.” Flaw: “The comparison fails to consider that a heavy rainfall and an emotionally charged situation are fundamentally different.”
What Flaw? “the author overlooks the possibility that the same thing may causally contribute to both.”
Mistaken Cause and Effect (Alt. Cause)
What Flaw? “improperly infers that all union members have a certain attribute from the premise that most union members have that attribute.”
Error of Composition
What Flaw? “the authors conclusion depends on defining a key term in two different ways.”
Uncertain use of a Term / Concept
What Flaw? “fails to consider that some voters may be neither strong supporters nor strong opponents of the suggested amendment.”
False Dilemma
What Flaw? “treats two very different cases as if they are similar.”
False Analogy
Mistaken Cause and Effect Flaw (Temporal / Sequence)
Assuming a causal relationship on the basis of the sequence of events. Example: “My friend did the chicken dance outside and then it started to rain. Therefore, the dance caused the rain.”
Evidence Flaw: Error in Assessing the Force of Evidence (Some of to prove true)
The author provides evidence that only supports, not proves the conclusion, to be true. Example: “We know that the defendant was in the vicinity of the robbery when the robbery occurred. Therefore the defendant is guilty of robbery.”
What Flaw? “Uses evidence drawn from a sample that may not be representative.”
Survey Error: Biased Sample
What Flaw? “the argument tries to undermine the claim by appealing to public opinion”
Appeal to Popular Opinion / Appeal to Numbers
Evidence Flaw: Error in Assessing the Force of Evidence (Some of to prove false)
Using insufficient evidence, the author jumps to a conclusion that a position is false based upon that insufficient evidence. Example: “Some analysts claim that Apple’s market-share for consumer electronics slipped considerably in 2015 due to lower demand for their products. However, the Apple Watch product did well against similar competitor products. Therefore, the analysts claim is false.” Flaw: While the Apple Watch may have done well in 2015, the analysts were not making their claim against the niche-market for wearable consumer electronics - they were asserting their claim against the much broader consumer electronics market as a whole. While the author provides some evidence that Apple did well in one product category, the author cannot use that limited evidence to disprove the analysts’ claim.
What Flaw? “The attack is directed against the person making the argument rather than directing it against the argument itself.”
Source Argument
What Flaw? “The argument bases a broad claim on a few exceptional instances.”
Overgeneralization CAUTION: This is frequently a wrong answer choice!
Flaw: Time Shift Errors
Assuming that conditions will remain constant over time, and that what was the case in the past will be the case in the present or the future. “what happened in the past is no guarantee in our present or future” Ex: “The company has always reimbursed me for meals when I’m on a business trip, so they will certainly reimburse me for meals on this business trip.”
Flaw: Uncertain Use of a Term or Concept
Using a term in different ways is inherently confusing and undermines the integrity of the argument. Ex: “Some people claim that the values that this country was built on are now being ignored by modern-day corporations. But this is incorrect. Corporations are purely profit-driven enterprises, beholden only to their shareholders, and as such they can only assess objects based on their value.” Flaw: The term ‘value’ is used in two different ways. Note: THIS ANSWER CHOICE APPEARS MORE FREQUENTLY AS IN INCORRECT ANSWER THAN ANY OTHER TYPE.
What Flaw? “assumes that every polled individual provided a truthful response.”
Survey Error: Inaccurate Answers by Respondents
What Flaw? “taking the absence of an occurrence as evidence that a necessary condition for that occurrence also did not take place.”
Conditional Reasoning Mistaken Negation
Flaw: False Dilemma
Assumes that only two courses of action are available when there may be others. Either this needs to happen or that must happen. Ex: “Recent accidents within the oil industry have made safety of operation a critical public safety issue. Because the industry cannot be expected to police itself, the government must step in and take action.” CAUTION: Do not confuse false dilemma with a situation where the author legitimately establishes that ONLY 2 possibilities exist. (1) “either A or B, but not both” establishes a limited set of possibilities, or (2) “you are either dead or alive.”
What Flaw? “The claims presented in support of the conclusion conflict with the other evidence provided.”
Internal Contradiction
What Flaw? “The stimulus generalizes on the basis of what could be exceptional cases.”
Overgeneralization CAUTION: This is frequently a wrong answer choice!
Flaw: Straw Man
Attacking an opponent’s position by ignoring their actual statements and instead attacking a distortion of those statements. The author “builds up a straw argument” which is then easier to knock down. Often this attack is accompanied by saying: “What you’re (really) saying is…” “if I understand you correctly, …” Example: Person A: “My proposal calls for a moderate tax increase on those that make more than $250,000 a year to help pay for education programs.” Person B: “But what you’re saying is that everyone should pay higher taxes, and so your proposal is unfair.” Flaw: Person B distorts the details via exaggeration to make it easier to attack Person A’s proposal.
What Flaw? “The stimulus introduces information that actually contradicts the conclusion.”
Internal Contradiction
