LSAT Test Prep 2024-2025

define ad hominem fallacy

When an argument attacks a person's character rather than addressing the issue as hand.

Ad Hominem fallacy Example

Dismissing someone's argument on climate change because they are not a scientist does not address the actual merits of their argument.

Reason of ad hominem fallacy

Shifts the focus from the argument's validity to the individual's personal traits

define straw man fallacy

When someone misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack

reason of straw man fallacy

by exaggerating, distorting, or outright fabricating someone else's position, the arguer creates an illusion of having refuted the original argument

straw man fallacy example

if one argues that we should have more regulation on industry to protect the environment, a straw man response might be, "My opponent wants to shut down all factories and put everyone out of work,"

Define false dilemma fallacy

aka False Dichotomy, presents only two options when, in fact, more exist

Reason of false dilemma fallacy

simplifies complex issues by reducing them to an either/or choice

False dilemma fallacy example

"You are either with us, or you are against us" ignores the possibility of neutrality or alternative positions

Define Slippery Slope fallacy

asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect

Reason of Slippery Slope fallacy

assumes a drastic outcome without any evidence to support such inevitability

Slippery Slope fallacy Example

"If we allow students to redo their assignments for a better grade, soon they will expect to pass classes without doing any work at all."

Define Circular fallacy Argument

aka Begging the Question. When the conclusion is included in the premise

Reason of Circular fallacy Argument

Instead of offering proof, the argument simply restates the conclusion in different words

Circular Argument fallacy Example

"We must trust the news because it is the most reliable source of information," where the reliability of the news is the conclusion being assumed as given.

Define Hasty Generalization fallacy

Involves making a broad generalization based on a small or unrepresentative sample

Reason of Hasty Generalization fallacy

Overlooks the diversity of data and leads to conclusions that are not statistically valid

Hasty Generalization fallacy Example

Concluding that all teenagers are irresponsible because a few you know are

Define Red Herring fallacy

Introduces irrelevant information into an argument to distract from the actual issue.

Reason of Red Herring fallacy

By diverting attention, it attempts to derail the discussion.

Red Herring fallacy example

"Why worry about environmental impacts from fracking when there are children starving in the world?" While the latter is a significant issue, it does not address the concerns about fracking.

Define Appeal to Authority fallacy

Misuses the respect people have for experts

Reason of appeal to authority fallacy

While it is not fallacious to cite legitimate experts, it becomes fallacious when the person cited is not an authority in the field related to the argument

Appeal to Authority fallacy example

Citing a famous actor's opinion on climate change policy does not hold the same weight as a climate scientist's research

Define Bandwagon fallacy

aka Appeal to Popularity. Suggests that something is true or correct because many people believe it.

Reason of Bandwagon fallacy

assumes that popularity equates to validity

Bandwagon fallacy example

"Everyone believes that this policy is beneficial, so it must be the right thing to do," does not provide actual evidence for the policy's effectiveness

Requirement of Assumption Questions

Requires identifying an unstated premise that is necessary for the argument to hold. The ability to pinpoint what an argument relies on, but doesn't explicitly state, helps in understanding the underlying logic of the argument.

What is an assumption that you can make about an argument that concludes that a policy will succeed because a similar policy worked elsewhere?

An assumption might be that the conditions in both places are comparable.

Requirement of Strengthen and Weaken Questions

Strengthen questions ask you to choose an option that makes the argument more robust, while weaken questions require identifying a choice that undermines the argument. Requires your ability to critically evaluate the impact of additional information on the argument's validity.

How can you strengthen an argument that a new law will reduce traffic accidents?

You might choose evidence showing a similar law's success in another region.

How can you weaken an argument that a new law will reduce traffic accidents?

You might select data showing the law's in-effectiveness in a comparable scenario.

Requirements of Inference questions

Asks you to deduce what must be true based on the given premises. Requires your ability to draw logical conclusions from the information presented. Focuses on what directly follows from the stated information.

Ex: If given premises about demographic trends, you might be asked to infer a conclusion about future population changes

Requirements of Main Point questions

Requires identifying the primary conclusion of the argument. A fundamental skill because understanding the main point is essential for analyzing the argument's structure. Questions often include distractors that might seem significant but do not represent the main conclusion. Recognizing the central thesis helps in avoiding these traps.

Requirements of Flaw questions

Requires your ability to identify errors in reasoning. Presents arguments that contain logical fallacies or flawed logic and ask you to pinpoint these errors.

Ex: If an argument incorrectly assumes that correlation implies causation, a flaw question would require identifying this mistake.

Requirements of Principle questions

Involves applying a general rule or principle to a specific situation. Requires the ability to understand broad concepts and see how they apply in particular cases.

Ex: A principle stating that "any law that infringes on individual freedoms is unjust" might be applied to determine whether a specific law is just

Requirements of Parallel Reasoning questions

Requires the ability to identify an argument that is structurally similar to the one presented. This involves understanding the logical form of the argument and finding another argument that follows the same pattern.

Ex: If an argument concludes that a particular outcome will happen based on a series of premises, a parallel reasoning question would ask you to find a different argument that uses the same logical structure to arrive at its conclusion.

Requirements of Evaluation questions

Asks you to determine what information would be most useful in assessing the argument. Requires the ability to identify gaps in the argument and understand what additional data would help in making a more informed judgement

Ex: If an argument relies on a study's results, an evaluation question might ask which aspect of the study needs further scrutiny to validate the argument.

Requirements of Completing the Argument questions

Provides a partially completed argument and ask you to choose the best conclusion or next step. Requires the ability to see the logical progression of an argument and understand what naturally follows from the given premises.