Logical Fallacies Practice Quiz

Attacking the individual rather than the argument itself is the hallmark of the ad hominem fallacy. The other options describe different logical missteps that do not target the person making the claim.

The straw man fallacy misrepresents an opponent's argument to create an easier target for refutation. The other fallacies distract or manipulate discussion in different ways.

A false dilemma restricts the argument to only two choices, when in reality more options are available. This type of fallacy oversimplifies the issue compared to other misdirection tactics.

The appeal to authority fallacy relies on the opinions of figures deemed authoritative rather than on logical evidence. The other options represent distinct logical errors that do not focus on authority endorsement.

A slippery slope argument is based on speculative and unfounded assumptions that a minor event will trigger extreme results. This is unlike logical or evidence-based reasoning.

Hasty generalization involves drawing a broad conclusion from a single or limited example, making it a faulty generalization. The other fallacies focus on misrepresentation or diversion rather than overgeneralization.

Cherry picking is the act of selectively using evidence that confirms a claim while dismissing evidence that might contradict it. This differs from other fallacies which do not center on selective evidence.

Begging the question involves circular reasoning where the conclusion is presupposed in the premises. This error in logic is distinct from appeals based on authority or limited alternatives.

A red herring diverts attention to an unrelated point, steering the discussion away from the original argument. This approach contrasts with misrepresentation or personal attacks.

The appeal to ignorance fallacy argues that a proposition is true simply because it hasn't been disproven, relying on the absence of contrary evidence. This differs from reasoning that establishes a claim on positive evidence.

The bandwagon fallacy claims that something is true or correct because a majority of people believe it. The other options involve attacking character, limiting choices, or speculative consequences.

The false cause fallacy mistakenly assumes that because two events occur together, one must cause the other. This error contrasts with fallacies that distract or misrepresent an argument.

The appeal to tradition fallacy argues that a belief or practice is correct solely based on its historical acceptance. This is different from suggesting something new is better or basing acceptance on popularity.

The no true Scotsman fallacy occurs when a generalization is protected from counterexamples by changing the criteria. This tactic differs from circular reasoning, misrepresentation, or personal attacks.

A non sequitur is an argument in which the conclusion does not logically arise from the premises provided. This error is distinct from personal attacks, misrepresentations, or oversimplified alternatives.

Person B dismisses the argument by attacking Person A's character and motives rather than addressing the evidence. This is a prototypical example of an ad hominem fallacy.

The argument exaggerates potential negative outcomes by assuming a minor change will lead to extreme consequences, demonstrating a slippery slope fallacy. It does not rely on authority or personal attacks.

This argument relies on the absence of contrary evidence to prove a claim, which is the essence of the appeal to ignorance fallacy. The other options represent different logical flaws.

The argument draws an inappropriate comparison between two dissimilar processes, making it a false analogy. The other fallacies do not involve such mismatched comparisons.

Equivocation occurs when a word with multiple meanings is used ambiguously within an argument, creating confusion. In this case, the shifting meaning of 'theory' misleads the audience rather than addressing the actual scientific evidence.