Question 1

Either you buy me a new Rolex watch, or I'll be late for all my meetings. I'm sure you don't want me to be late, so you'll buy me the Rolex. How about that one with diamonds on the face?

Accepted Answer

The statement presents a false dichotomy by suggesting there are only two options: buying a new Rolex watch or being late for meetings, ignoring other possible solutions to avoid being late.

Question 2

Nobody has ever seen Janice Rogers eat beef, chicken, lamb, pork, or any other kind of meat. We conclude that Janice is not a meat eater.

Accepted Answer

Janice's lack of meat consumption is the only evidence given for her being a non-meat eater.

Question 3

It's appropriate for parents to invade their children's privacy to protect them from danger. But the role of government is similar to that of parents. Therefore, it's appropriate for the government to invade the privacy of citizens to protect the country.

Accepted Answer

This statement commits a weak analogy fallacy. While it may be appropriate for parents to invade their child's privacy in specific situations, the relationship between a government and its citizens is fundamentally different. Parents have legal and moral responsibility for their children, while governments have a responsibility to serve and protect citizens but must also respect their individual rights and privacy. The comparison between these two relationships is not strong enough to justify the conclusion that it's appropriate for the government to invade citizens' privacy in order to protect the country.

Question 4

Witness Clark testified that he saw the defendant emerge from the burgled house with an expensive camera. But, members of the jury, you should reject this testimony because Clark suffers from brain damage, and he has trouble remembering things accurately.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Witness Clark testified that he saw the...

Question 5

Dr. Williams cheated Medicare by exaggerating expenses, and Dr. Fox cheated by submitting fees for nonexistent patients. Dr. Harris defrauded a dozen insurance companies by requiring unneeded lab tests. The apparent conclusion is that all doctors cheat.

Accepted Answer

The argument commits the fallacy of hasty generalization by using a few examples of doctors who cheated to make a broad claim that all doctors cheat. The actions of a few do not necessarily represent the entire group.

Question 6

Renee Richards argues in favor of reducing the patient load of our nurses. But it's obvious why she says this. Renee is a nurse herself, so of course she wants a reduced patient load. Nobody should pay too much attention to her pleas.

Accepted Answer

The argument dismisses Renee Richards' claims not on the basis of the argument's merits but rather on her circumstances or position as a nurse, suggesting her perspective is biased due to her profession. This is an example of an argument against the person, circumstantial, where the circumstances of the person making the argument are used to discredit the argument itself.

Question 7

My dear, you shouldn't hesitate a minute before buying a new mink coat. Real fur is in right now, and a full mink is the ultimate in fashion. It tells the whole world that you have exquisite taste and the financial means to express it.

Accepted Answer

The statement uses the appeal to the people fallacy by suggesting that buying a mink coat will gain social approval and demonstrate wealth and taste, thus appealing to the desire to fit in or be admired by others.

Question 8

There is a good deal of concern these days about whether eating fast food is unhealthy. But most fast food is really tasty. Just think of those juicy McDonald's hamburgers dripping with melted cheese, and the wonderful golden fries. And the crispy Chicken McNuggets, the creamy shakes, and the Egg McMuffins. How could anyone complain about today's fast food?

Accepted Answer

The argument is diverting attention from the concern about the health consequences of eating fast food by focusing on the taste of the food. This is an example of a red herring fallacy.

Question 9

The sign on the restaurant wall says "No Smoking Rules Enforced." Therefore, we can probably smoke, since the smoking rules aren't enforced.

Accepted Answer

The fallacy here is amphiboly, which involves ambiguity in the structure of a sentence. The sentence "No Smoking Rules Enforced" can be ambiguously interpreted as either rules against smoking are enforced or there are no rules about smoking that are enforced.

Question 10

In testimony to the court, Harold Geyser, President of the American Accounting Society, said that the CFO of the Abracadabra Corporation falsified the corporation's financial statements. Therefore, members of the jury, you must conclude that the CFO did indeed falsify these statements.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In testimony to the court, Harold Geyser,...

Question 11

Jason's quartz watch runs about 3 years and 4 months on a fresh battery. Therefore, probably David's watch, which is the same make and model as Jason's, runs about 3 years and 4 months on a fresh battery.

Accepted Answer

There is no fallacy in this statement because it is reasonable to assume that two watches of the same make and model would have a similar lifespan on a fresh battery. This is not an accident (A), false cause (B), weak analogy (C), or hasty generalization (E) because it is based on a specific and relevant comparison.

Question 12

Either the Nile or the Amazon is the longest river. But the Amazon is not the longest river. Therefore, the Nile is the longest river.

Accepted Answer

The argument logically concludes that if the Amazon is not the longest river, then the Nile must be, based on the premise that only one of these two is the longest river. This does not contain a logical fallacy within the context provided.

Question 13

Scientists have identified a "God gene," which they think is responsible for the widespread belief in a deity. Obviously God planted that gene in humans to ensure their belief in God.

Accepted Answer

The statement assumes the conclusion (that God planted the gene) within the premise without providing evidence, which is a form of circular reasoning known as begging the question.

Question 14

Sylvia is a wonderful ice skater. But every ice skater is a person. Therefore, Sylvia is a wonderful person.

Accepted Answer

This is an example of equivocation, where the word "person" is used in two different senses (as a category that includes all individuals, and as a descriptor of moral qualities). Just because someone is good at ice skating does not necessarily mean they are a good person.

Question 15

Jessica has played 8 games of Bingo without winning a single game. Therefore, her chances are much better for winning the next game.

Accepted Answer

This is an example of false cause fallacy, because Jessica's past performance does not necessarily affect her future chances of winning. Each game is independent and her chances remain the same.

Question 16

Professor Carson argues in favor of banning skateboards on campus. Apparently Carson is against anything that has wheels. No bicycles, no roller blades, not even any wheelchairs. But handicapped students need their wheelchairs to get around. From this it should be clear that Professor Carson's argument makes no sense.

Accepted Answer

The argument misrepresents Professor Carson's position by exaggerating it to include all wheeled vehicles, including wheelchairs, which is likely not his actual argument. This distortion is a classic example of a straw man fallacy.

Question 17

Every ingredient in this new drink concoction is highly alcoholic. Therefore, the drink is highly alcoholic.

Accepted Answer

The statement logically concludes that if every ingredient in the drink is highly alcoholic, then the drink itself is highly alcoholic. This follows the principle of composition, where the properties of the parts are transferred to the whole, and in this context, it is applied correctly, not fallaciously.

Question 18

Whatever is bright is intelligent. But the sun is extremely bright. Therefore, the sun is extremely intelligent.

Accepted Answer

The fallacy present is equivocation, which occurs when a word is used in two different senses within an argument. In this case, "bright" is used in the sense of emitting a lot of light when referring to the sun, and in the sense of being intelligent when applied to the conclusion that the sun is extremely intelligent.

Question 19

I can see that you don't want to adopt this little kitten. Why are you so heartless?

Accepted Answer

The question assumes that the person is heartless for not adopting the kitten, which is a complex question fallacy.

Question 20

The Contract Clause of the Constitution gives everyone the right to enter into contracts. Therefore, it should be legal to hire a hit man to bump off that guy who's been pestering you.

Accepted Answer

The Contract Clause allows for legal contracts, but hiring a hit man involves an illegal act, which is a misapplication of the principle (accident fallacy).

Quiz 3: Informal Fallacies