Logical Fallacies

Question 1

Appeal to Force

Answer 1

Issues a threat with some negative repercussion if the audience doesn’t accept/agree.

Question 2

Appeal to (Improper) Authority

Answer 2

Expected to accept argument from a source that may not be reliable (authority an unrelated field)

Question 3

Appeal to Tradition

Answer 3

Asserts that premise must be true because people have always believed in it or have done it. Work in the past, work now.

Question 4

Appeal to Popular Opinion (Bandwagon)

Answer 4

Claiming that a position is true because most people believe it is.

Question 5

Appeal to Lack of Evidence

Answer 5

Appealing to a lack of information to prove a point or arguing that since the opposition cannot disprove a claim, the opposite stance must be true.

Question 6

Begging the Question

Answer 6

Using a premise to prove a conclusion when the premise itself assumes the conclusion is true; The first claim is initially loaded with the very conclusion one has yet to prove.

Question 7

Circular Reasoning

Answer 7

Often writers using this fallacy take one idea and phrase it into two statements. The assertions differ sufficiently to obscure the fact that the same proposition occurs as both a premise and a conclusion. The writer then tries to “prove” his or her assertion by merely repeating it in different words.

Question 8

False Dilemma (Either/Or)

Answer 8

Suggesting only two solutions when other options could also available.

Question 9

Hasty Generalization

Answer 9

Arriving at a conclusion based on an inadequate evidence or a sample that is too small.

Question 10

Misleading Statistic

Answer 10

Statistics that are not gathered by a large majority or that are portrayed as more drastic than they really are.

Question 11

Faulty Analogy

Answer 11

Relying on comparisons rather than facts to prove a point.

Question 12

Loaded (Complex) Question

Answer 12

Combining two questions as if they were one, when really they should be answered or discussed separately.

Question 13

Non Sequitur

Answer 13

Using a premise to prove an unrelated point. The conclusion doesn’t logically follow the explanation.

Question 14

Poisoning the Well

Answer 14

Presenting negative information about a person before he/she speaks so as to discredit the person’s argument.

Question 15

Post Hoc (Propter Hoc)

Answer 15

Occurs when the writer/speaker mistakenly assumes that, because the first event preceded the second event, it must mean that the first event caused the later one.

Question 16

Red Herring

Answer 16

Introducing an unrelated or invalid point to distract the reader/ audience from the actual argument

Question 17

Slippery Slope

Answer 17

Suggesting that one step will inevitably lead to more, eventually negative steps.

Question 18

Stacking the Deck

Answer 18

When a writer/speaker tries to prove a point by focusing on only one side of the argument while ignoring the other; speaker stacks evidence in his/her favor by listing only those elements that support his/her case.

Question 19

Straw Man

Answer 19

Attacking one of the opposition’s unimportant or small arguments, while ignoring the opposition’s best argument; oversimplifying an argument to attack the more simplified version instead of addressing the entire complex argument provided by the opponent

Question 20

ad Hominem

Answer 20

Discrediting an argument by attacking the person who makes it rather than the argument itself.