Task 4

Question 1

1.

Fallacy

Answer 1

A defect in an argument that arises from a mistake in reasoning or the creation of an illusion that makes a bad argument appear good.

Question 2

Two kinds of fallacies

Answer 2

Formal fallacy: Detectable by analyzing the form of an argument
Informal fallacy: Detectable only by analyzing the content of an argument

Question 3

Appeal to force

Answer 3

Arguer threatens the reader/listener.

Fallacy of relevance

Question 4

Appeal to pity

Answer 4

Arguer elicits pity from the reader/listener.

Fallacy of relevance

Question 5

Appeal to the people

Answer 5

Arguer incites a mob mentality (direct form) or appeals to our desire for security, love, or respect (indirect form).

Fallacy of relevance

Question 6

Argument against the person

Answer 6

Arguer personally attacks an opposing arguer by verbally abusing the opponent (ad hominem abusive), presenting the opponent as predisposed to argue as he or she does (ad hominem circumstantial), or by presenting the opponent as a hypocrite (tu quoque).

Question 7

Accident

Answer 7

A general rule is applied to a specific case it was not intended to cover.

Fallacy of relevance

Question 8

Straw man

Answer 8

Arguer distorts an opponent’s argument and then attacks the distorted argument.

Fallacy of relevance

Question 9

Missing the point

Answer 9

Arguer draws a conclusion different from the one supported by the premises (Do not cite this fallacy if another fallacy fits)

Fallacy of relevance

Question 10

Red herring

Answer 10

Arguer leads the reader/listener off the track

Fallacy of relevance

Question 11

Appeal to unqualified authority

Answer 11

Arguer cites an untrustworthy authority.

Fallacy of weak induction

Question 12

Appeal to ignorance

Answer 12

Premises report that nothing is known or proved about some subject, and then a conclusion is drawn about that subject.

Fallacy of weak induction

Question 13

Hasty generalization

Answer 13

A general conclusion is drawn from an atypical sample

Fallacy of weak induction

Question 14

False cause

Answer 14

Conclusion depends on a nonexistent or minor causal connection. This fallacy has four forms: post hoc ergo propter hoc, non causa pro causa, oversimplified cause, and the gambler’s fallacy

Fallacy of weak induction

Question 15

Begging the question

Answer 15

Arguer creates the illusion that inadequate premises are adequate by leaving out a key premise, restating the conclusion as a premise, or reasoning in a circle.

Fallacy of presumption

Question 16

Complex question

Answer 16

Multiple questions are concealed in a single question.

Fallacy of presumption

Question 17

False dichotomy

Answer 17

An “either . . . or . . . ” premise presents two unlikely alternatives as if they were the only ones available

Fallacy of presumption

Question 18

Suppressed evidence

Answer 18

Arguer ignores important evidence that requires a different conclusion.

Fallacy of presumption

Question 19

Equivocation

Answer 19

Conclusion depends on a shift in meaning of a word or phrase.

Fallacy of ambiguity

Question 20

Amphiboly

Answer 20

Conclusion depends on an incorrect interpretation of an ambiguous statement made by someone other than the arguer.

Fallacy of ambiguity

Question 21

Composition

Answer 21

An attribute is incorrectly transferred from the parts to the whole.

Fallacy of illicit transference

Question 22

Division

Answer 22

An attribute is incorrectly transferred from the whole to the parts

Fallacy of illicit transference

Question 23

ARG method

Answer 23

Method for evaluating arguments
A - Acceptability of premise
R - Relevance of premises
G - Good or adequate grounds for conclusion