logical fallacies

Please type in your own example for each of the following logical fallacies, and submit to the designated dropbox,

Logical Fallacy Worksheet: for detailed descriptions, see “Avoiding Flawed Logic” (pp. 337-)

definition: fallacy: an error of reasoning based on faulty use of evidence or incorrect inference (interpretation of the facts)

1. hasty generalization (338) — drawing a conclusion based on insufficient evidence
1. The stock market went down after I invested in an IRA, so therefore I should stop investing in the stock market.
your example.:__________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
1. post hoc or doubtful cause (338-9) –one event follows another, but it may not be caused by the other event.
1. When I bring an umbrella to school, it does not rain. Because I have an umbrella, that is the reason it does not rain.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
1. false analogy (340) –a comparison is drawn between two situations that are not parallel
1. Producing meat can be as efficient as producing cars in a factory.
your ex.: ___________________________________________________________
1. ad hominem (341)–an unfair attack on the person giving the opinion that is not related to the subject at hand
1. How can Mitt Romney be a good president if he speaks French?
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. false dilemma (342)–the arguer implies that only two alternatives are available
1. We should either keep building up troop levels or pull out completely.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. slippery slope (342)–an arguer suggests that one step will lead to a worse step, but she should provide evidence to back up this

claim
1. If we allow hate speech in school, pretty soon schools will be overrun with chaos and violence.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. begging the question (343)–the arguer makes a statement assuming the issue in question has already been proven
1. Standardized testing will improve education by making schools better.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. straw man (343-4)–the arguer attacks a view that is similar but different from that of his opposition—often something that is

easier to knock down
1. Those who want to regulate hate speech do not care about protecting free speech.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. faulty use of authority (338)–could be a faulty use of expert opinions.
1. Because Paul Newman was a famous actor, he must make good salad dressings.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. non sequitur (345)–it does not follow—the arguer gives a reason that does not support his claim
1. Because she did not respond to my email, she does not like me.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. TuQuoque (Two Wrongs Make a Right) (344)–”you too”–the arguer says that it is hypocritical for you to criticize me if you are

doing the same thing.
1. How can you ask me to stop smoking when you eat too many sweets?
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. distorting the facts –facts can be distorted or left unreported for the benefit of the person doing the distorting.
1. Although the company knew the peanut butter was contaminated, they shipped it anyway as if it were safe.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________
1. oversimplification –generalizing in a way that exaggerates or oversimplifies the truth.
1. If you try hard enough, you will succeed.
your ex.: ____________________________________________________________