Inductive

Question 1

FALLACIES OF EXCEPTION // Accident

Answer 1

arguing from the general to the particular and failing to apply a relevant exception

“A fruit salad should be made with fruit;
tomato is a fruit;
therefore tomato can go in a fruit salad”

Question 2

FALLACIES OF EXCEPTION // Converse Accident

Answer 2

arguing from an particular exception to a general principle; apply an exception to the rule inappropriately

“Lawyers are allowed to practice law, therefore anyone should be allowed to practice law!”

Question 3

FALLACIES OF EXCEPTION // Overwhelming Exception

Answer 3

a valid generalisation, with an exception so broad it undermines the general rule

“‘i’ before ‘e’, except after ‘c’.”

Question 4

FALLACIOUS CONCLUSION SCOPE // Hasty Generalisation

Answer 4

Jumping to Conclusions

drawing conclusions from an insufficient sample/evidence

A = P
B = P
therefore C, D, E… = P

“Every German I’ve met has blue eyes, therefore all Germans have blue eyes.”

Question 5

FALLACIOUS CONCLUSION SCOPE // Hasty Generalisation // Anecdotal

Answer 5

Fallacy of Misleading Vividness

drawing a conclusion from an anecdotal experience

“My uncle smoked 20 a day and lived to 95, so clearly it’s not as bad as they say.”

Question 6

FALLACIOUS CONCLUSION SCOPE // Slothful Induction

Answer 6

failing to acknowledge a justified generalisation; explaining away by other, improbable explanations

“Michael has had ten car crashes in the last six months, yet refuses to accept the conclusion that he’s a bad driver”