logical fallacies

Question 1

logical fallacy:

Answer 1

arguments that are flawed by their very nature or structure; an error in reasoning that renders an argument invalid

Question 2

ad hominem

Answer 2

target: attacking your opponents character or personal traits to undermine their argument: personal attack

Question 3

ambiguity

Answer 3

candle/two faces: using double meanings or ambiguities of language to mislead or misrepresent the truth

Question 4

anecdotal

Answer 4

speech bubble: using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument, especially to dismiss statistics

Question 5

appeal to fear

Answer 5

spider: attempting to frighten people into agreeing with the arguer by threatening their well being or predicting unrealistically dire consequences

Question 6

appeal to nature

Answer 6

leaf: making the argument that because something is ‘natural’ it is therefore valid, justified, good, or ideal

Question 7

bandwagon

Answer 7

wagon: appealing to the popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation

Question 8

cherry picking

Answer 8

cherry: carefully choosing certain pieces of evidence while ignoring others to suit ones argument

Question 9

circular reasoning

Answer 9

question mark in circle: using a conclusion as evidence to prove itself true, creating a circular logic

Question 10

false dichotomy

Answer 10

checkered box: where two alternative options are presented as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist

Question 11

false equivalency

Answer 11

pear≠orange: an inaccurate, inappropriate, or misleading comparison between two things

Question 12

faulty appeal to authority

Answer 12

crown: insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered

Question 13

faulty appeal to emotion

Answer 13

heart: manipulating people’s feelings to get an emotional response rather than present a valid or compelling argument

Question 14

genetic

Answer 14

genetic helix: judging something as good or bad based on the reputation of where it comes from, or from who it comes

Question 15

hasty generalization

Answer 15

people: leaps to a conclusion based on a small sample size, rather than looking at statistics that are much more in line with the typical or average situation

Question 16

loaded question

Answer 16

bomb/?: asking a question that has an assumption built into it so that it can’t be answered without appearing guilty

Question 17

non sequitur

Answer 17

snowflake/skull: is a statement where a conclusion is made that doesn’t logically follow from the premise; using a piece of evidence that doesn’t fit the overall argument

Question 18

red herring

Answer 18

fish: uses misleading or unrelated evidence to purposefully change the topic in order to distract from the original topic

Question 19

shifting the burden of proof

Answer 19

person holding the box: making a claim without proper evidence, then demanding the opponent disprove it; making your opponent responsible for proving your claims

Question 20

slippery slope

Answer 20

person falling: asserting that if we allow one relatively minor thing to happen, it will create a chain reaction that leads to a disastrous outcome; a snowball effect

Question 21

straw man

Answer 21

scarecrow: distorting or simplifying someones argument to make it easier to attack, then addressing that distortion rather than the actual claim.