Match the Flaw (LR) Question

Correlation vs. Causation 

Mistakes a correlation for a causal relationship, ignoring other possible causes. 

• Example: A recent study found that students who drink energy drinks tend to get better grades. Therefore, drinking energy drinks must help improve academic performance.

• Flaw: Just because two things happen together (correlation) doesn’t mean one causes the other. Maybe high-achieving students are more likely to drink energy drinks.

Conditional Logic Flaws 

Misuses “if–then” logic, e.g., affirming the consequent or denying the antecedent. 

• Using invalid logic forms (denying, consequent).

Circular Reasoning 

When an argument’s conclusion is just the same as one of its premises, the argument goes in a circle without actually proving anything. 

• Example: We know the defendant is guilty because he committed the crime.

• In this example the premise and conclusion are the same. The argument already assume what it is trying to prove.

Equivocation 

Uses the same word with different meanings within the argument. 

• Example: A theory is just a guess. Since evolution is just a theory, it’s nothing more than a guess.

• The word "theory" is used ambiguously. In science, a theory is a well-supported explanation, not merely a guess.

Generalization from Small/Biased Sample 

Draws a broad conclusion from an unrepresentative or too-small sample.

• Example: I asked five of my friends, and none of them like horror movies. So therefore, horror movies are not popular.

• Flaw: Draws a broad conclusion from a small and likely biased sample (just five friends).

False Dilemma (False Choice) 

Assumes only two options exist when others are possible. 

• Example: Either we ban all cars from the city center or we continue to suffer from unbearable traffic. Since banning all cars is unrealistic, we’ll have to live with traffic.

• Flaw: Assumes only two options exist when there could be other solutions (e.g., congestion pricing, public transport improvements).

Straw Man Argument

Misrepresents or oversimplifies an opponent’s position to refute a weaker version of it. 

• "We should have some rules to limit junk food in schools."

• Person B (Straw Man):
  "Oh, so you want to ban all tasty food and force kids to eat only broccoli?"

Appeal to Authority 

Uses an authority’s opinion as conclusive evidence, even if the authority lacks expertise. 

• Example: A famous actor says that this new vitamin boosts brain power. Therefore, it must be effective.

• Flaw: Uses the opinion of someone who is not an expert in the relevant field as conclusive evidence.

Possibility / Certainty  

Concludes something must be true just because it could be true. 

• Example: It’s possible that aliens exist. Therefore, aliens definitely exist.

• Flaw: Concludes that something is certainly true just because it could be true.

Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions 

Treats a necessary condition as sufficient or vice versa. 

Example:

In order to drive, you must have a license.
John has a license.
Therefore, John is driving.

Flaw: Having a license is necessary to drive, but it’s not sufficient — someone can have a license and still not be driving.