General

Question 1

Argument to Moderation

Answer 1

argumentum ad temperantium
False Compromise
Argument from the Middle Ground
Golden Mean Fallacy

assuming a compromise between two opposed positions will always be correct

P or R
Q is between P and R
therefore Q is true

“John advocates punching babies everyday, Sarah says we should never punch babies. Michael takes the moderate position, and agrees to punch a baby every second day.”

Question 2

Association Fallacy

Answer 2

cf. Guilt by Association

the assumption that the qualities of one element are necessarily part of another

P is associated with Q
Q has property x
Therefore, P has property x

“I once met a banker who was overweight; Douglas is also a banker - he must be overweight too”

Question 3

Circular Reasoning

Answer 3

circulus in probando
Circular Logic
Fallacy of Vacuity
Begging the Question

arguing in a circle; beginning with what you end with; to believe the premises, we must already accept the conclusion

A is true because B
B is true because A

“Whatever is less dense than water will float, because such objects won’t sink in water.”

Question 4

Continuum Fallacy

Answer 4

Line-drawing
Sorites fallacy/paradox
Argument from the Heap
Fallacy of the Beard

falsely assuming that because change between close elements on a spectrum is imperceptible, it is impossible between distant elements

“P and Q are opposites on a spectrum
there is no definable point where P becomes Q
therefore there is no difference between P and Q”

“One day’s growth will not change a person from clean-shaven to bearded, therefore any number of days will never allow one to grow a beard.”

Question 5

FALLACIES OF DEFINITION // Circular Definition

Answer 5

the definition includes the term being defined

‘a book is illustrated if it contains illustrations’

Question 6

FALLACIES OF DEFINITION // Conflicting Conditions

Answer 6

the definition includes contradictory descriptions

“A: a ‘free society’ is one where everyone can do as they please, and no-one is allowed to curtail the rights of another.
B: what if it pleases me to curtail the rights of another?”

Question 7

FALLACIES OF DEFINITION // Incongruity

Answer 7

the definition’s parameters are too broad or too narrow, limiting desired items or including the undesired

“A fruit is anything that grows on a tree.”
“A fruit is anything you can put in a fruit salad.”

Question 8

FALLACIES OF DEFINITION // Mutual Exclusivity

Answer 8

the definition excludes what it attempts to define

“A human being is any four-legged herbivore”

Question 9

FALLACIES OF DEFINITION // Obscurity

Answer 9

Failure to Eludicate

the definition is as/more complex as the term, unhelpful in clarifying

‘an apple is any edible, spherical “fructus” that employs a skin of a primary or secondary colour’

Question 10

FALLACIES OF DEFINITION // Definist Fallacy

Answer 10

Socratic Fallacy
Fallacy of Loaded Terms
Persuasive Definition

defining key terms within an argument in a biased manner, in favour of your conclusion

P has definition x
definition y is helpful to my conclusion
therefore P has definition y

“Why should Democrats (being Communist anarchists) be allowed the same rights as honest, America-loving Republicans?”

Question 11

Furtive Fallacy

Answer 11

assuming outcomes, typically major historical events, are the result of conspiracy/malfeasance/corruption by key players

P or Q
P is conspiratorial
therefore P is true

“Of course the Patriots won! The entire tournament result was decided beforehand by the Commissioner and the ad executives to drive up profits!”

Question 12

Historian’s Fallacy

Answer 12

falsely assuming past decision-makers shared the information and perspective of later judgers

A claims P
A is not aware of ¬P
therefore A is foolish

“A: Why did Hitler invade Russia? It was a disaster!
B: at the time, there were numerous factors that made it plausible and attractive.”

Question 13

Kafka-Trapping

Answer 13

a denial of x is taken as evidence of x, as denial is expected of all true x

A claims P
both G and NG would claim P
therefore A is G

“A: Are you a spy?
B: No!
A: That’s exactly what a spy would say - you must be a spy.”

Question 14

Kettle Logic

Answer 14

defending a proposition with multiple arguments that contradict each other

P
¬P
therefore Q

“I’m not a Christian because:

a) there is no God
b) the only true God is Allah”

Question 15

Relative Privation

Answer 15

reducing emphasis on a claim by comparison to a worse/better scenario

P is worse than Q
therefore Q is not bad

“A: I’m sad because I lost my leg in an explosion.
B: That’s not so bad, some people lost both legs!”

Question 16

Suppressed Evidence

Answer 16

Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence
Cherry-Picking

deliberately suppressing, overlooking or forgetting evidence relevant and significant to the conclusion drawn

P and Q
only P favours A’s conclusion
A only mentions P

“A: I got top marks in my education at Oxford…
B: You fail to mention it’s Oxford, Mississippi!”

Question 17

Suppressed Evidence // Texas Sharpshooter

Answer 17

Clustering Illusion

emphasizing the similarities in data and ignoring the differences, leading to false conclusions

“Yesterday I made 10,000 predictions about today, and amazingly one has come true - I’m a prophet!”

Question 18

Unfalsifiability

Answer 18

an argument that cannot be tested or disproven, having limited explanatory value

“There’s an invisible ghost only I can detect behind you, that’s saying you should give me money. Also he says if you don’t you’ll suffer bad lack at some future date.”

Question 19

Vacuous Truth

Answer 19

a conditional statement with a false antecedent, thus that anything can be said

if P, then Q
¬P

“If London is in Paris, I am a turtle!”