Logic exam 1

ad hominem abusive

The fallacy is distinguished by an attack on alleged character flaws of a person instead of the person’s argument.

ad hominem circumstantial

the fallacy occurs when someone’s argument is rejected based on the circumstances of the person’s life.

poisoning the well

the fallacy occurs when a person is attacked before they have a chance to present their case.

tu quoique

the fallacy is distinguished by the specific attempt of one person to avoid the issue at hand by claiming the other person is a hypocrite.

appeal to the people

the fallacy occurs when an argument manipulates a psychological need or desire, such as the desire to belong to a popular group, or the need for group solidarity, so that the read or listener will accept the conclusion.

appeal to pity

the fallacy results from an exclusive reliance on a sense of pity or mercy for support of a conclusion

appeal to fear or force

The fallacy occurs when a threat of harmful consequences is used to force acceptance of a course of action that would otherwise be unacceptable.

rigid application of a generalization

when a generalization or rule is inappropriately applied to the case at hand. The fallacy results from the mistaken belief that the generalization or rule is universal.

Hasty generalization

An argument that relies on a small sample that is unlikely to represent the population.

Composition

There are two forms of this fallacy. (1) the mistaken transfer of an attribute of an object as a whole to the individual parts of the object and the mistaken transfer of an attribute of a class to the individual members of the class.

division

There are two forms of the fallacy. (1) the mistaken transfer of an attribute of individual parts of the object to the object as a whole and the mistaken transfer of an attribute of a class to the individual members of the class.

Biased Sample

An argument that uses a non representative sample as support for a statistical claim about an entire population.

post hoc

the fallacy occurs from the mistaken assumption that just because one event occurred before another event, the first ever must have caused the second event,

slippery slope

an argument that attempts to connect a series of occurrences such that the first link in a chain leads directly to a second link, and so on, until a final unwanted situation is said to be the inevitable result.

begging the question

In one type, the fallacy occurs when a premise is simply reworded in the conclusion. in a second type, called circular reasoning, a set of statements seem to support each other with no clear beginning or end point. in a third type, the argument assumes certain key information that may be controversial or Is not supported by facts.

complex question

the fallacy occurs when a single question actually contains multiple parts and an unestablished hidden assumption.

appeal to ignorance

an argument built on a position of ignorance claims either that a statement is true because it has not been proven to be false or a statement must be false because it has been proven to be true.

appeal to an unqualified authority.

An argument that relies on the opinions of people who either have no expertise, training, or knowledge relevant to the issue at hand, or whose testimony is not trustworthy.

false dichotomy

the fallacy occurs when it is assumed that only two choices are possible, when in fact, others exist.

equivocation

The fallacy occurs when the conclusion of an argument relies on an intention or unintentional shift in the meaning of a term or phrase in the premises.

straw man

the fallacy occurs when an argument is misrepresented in order to create a new argument that can easily be refuted. the new argument is so weak that I tis “made of straw”. that arguer then falsely claims that his opponent’s real argument has been defeated.

red herring

the fallacy occurs when someone completely ignores an opponent’s position and changes the subject, diverting the discussion in a new direction.

misleading precision

A claim that appears to be statistically significant but is not,

Missing the point

When premises that seem to lead logically to one conclusion are used instead to support an unexpected

deductive argument

Under the assumption that the premises are true it is impossible for the confusion to be false.

inductive argument

under the assumption that the premises are true, it is improbable for the conclusion to be false.