PHI 105 Topic 4 Quiz: Fallacies in Everyday Life Quiz

PHI 105 Topic 4 Quiz: Fallacies in Everyday Life Quiz

(PHI 105 Topic 4 Quiz)

PHI 105 Topic 4 Quiz: Fallacies In Everyday Life Quiz (Version 1)

Directions: Please read the example and choose the fallacy that best describes the type of fallacious reasoning used.

1. “There are two types of students- the student that works really hard and does well and the student that does nothing and fails.”
2. Robert made his first purchase on ebay and the package did not arrive on time. Robert says he will not purchase another product on ebay because they never arrive on time.
3. The top four leaders of a University were chosen to work on a project together. Since they are the best leaders they should be the perfect team to complete the project.

Permalink: https://collepals.com/phi-105-topic-4-…eryday-life-quiz/

1. A couple recently put in a pool in their backyard. Since the pool was put in, they have had quite a few rabbits hopping around the yard.  They determined that the pool must have attracted the rabbits to their yard.
2. Most public schools have embraced the policy that students cannot bring in homemade treats to handout to the class. Some parents are upset by this because they think if they won’t allow students to bring homemade snacks for other students, they will continue to make more rules until students can’t even bring in their own lunch.
3. There must be other universes in outer space since there is no evidence to prove that there are not any other universes.
4. Joseph ran for President of his high school’s senior class. When Joseph’s opponent, Sandra, won the election he felt that the voting was rigged and that the people distributing ballots must have told students to vote for Sandra or they may have bribed the voters with candy.
5. Jones teaches math by giving students daily timed tests to help them learn addition and subtraction facts. When another teacher asked why she doesn’t use the new manipulatives available to teach students how to add and subtract, Ms. Jones replied “I don’t know, that’s just the way I have always taught the addition and subtraction facts!”
6. Michael Phelps, a popular Olympic swimmer acts in commercials to promote a shampoo. Promoting products using famous people as a sales tactic is an example of:
7. Mike left work 15 minutes early because everyone else seemed to leave at least 15 minutes early on Fridays so he figured it must be okay to do.
   

   ---

PHI 105 Topic 4 Quiz: Fallacies In Everyday Life Quiz (Version 2)

1. Joseph ran for President of his high school’s senior class.  When Joseph’s opponent, Sandra, won the election, he felt that the voting was rigged and that the people
distributing ballots must have told students to vote for Sandra or they may have bribed the voters with candy.

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

2. Mike left work 15 minutes early because everyone else seemed to leave at least 15 minutes early on Fridays so he figured it must be okay to do.

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

 

3. Formulating a complex or unlikely explanation for an event when a simpler explanation would do.

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

4. The top four leaders of a University were chosen to work on a project together.  Since they are the best leaders they should be the perfect team to complete the project.

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

5. This error occurs when we don’t acknowledge that there may be grey areas that exist, both alternatives could be true, and other possibilities may exist.

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

6. “You should not eat at fast food restaurants because if you do then soon that is all you will be eating.”

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

7. “Stanley Clarke is the best bassist ever because he is better at playing the bass than anyone who has ever lived.”

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

8. Putting two or more good things together does not necessarily mean they will be good together.

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

9. “With the U.S. unemployment rate at 9.1%, every state, county, and city has
unemployment problems (Johnson, 2011).”

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

10. Saying something must be true (or false) because there is little-to-no evidence to prove that it is not true (or not false).

Which one of the following fallacies most align with this statement?

 

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

Fallacies in Everyday Life

Introduction

In the world of logic, there are many fallacies. Some of them are so common that you might not even be aware you’ve made one until someone explains it to you. Others can be more subtle and tricky to catch. While these mistakes aren’t necessarily harmful in themselves, they can lead people astray when considering certain issues and facts from different perspectives or identifying facts based on their own experiences rather than on data collected by others. To get a better understanding of how these fallacies work, let’s look at some examples of common ones and then learn how to avoid them!

A fallacy is an error in reasoning.

A fallacy is an error in reasoning. It can be committed intentionally or unintentionally, and some fallacies are more common than others. Some of the most common fallacies include:

• Analogy (A is B) – using a comparison between two items that have nothing in common but are similar in one way or another to conclude that one thing is like another

• Argument by analogy (A has property B because it has property C) – drawing conclusions from similar facts about separate cases

• Post hoc ergo propter hoc – concluding that something happened because it followed events; this fallacy occurs when someone makes a prediction based on past experiences

Appeal to Force

The fallacy of appealing to force is an argument that uses strong language, or even just an intense tone in order to make a point. It’s a common mistake made by people who have not been trained in logic and reasoning; they think if an argument is forceful enough, then it must have some kind of truth behind it.

It’s important to remember that this type of reasoning doesn’t work like this at all! An appeal to force will always lead you down the wrong path if you’re trying to determine whether something is true or false.

Appeal to Pity

Appeal to pity is when you use an emotional argument to try to convince someone to do something. This can be a fallacy because it does not follow the rules of logic, and it also makes your argument less persuasive.

Appeal to emotion has been shown in many studies over the years as being one of the most effective ways for people to make decisions about their lives (1). People are often able to make decisions based on how they feel rather than what’s logical or rational at the time (2). However, this kind of thinking can lead us astray if we aren’t careful about how we do it.

In particular, appeal-to-pity fallacies involve using pity as a basis for making decisions: “I feel sorry for you so I’ll help you.” Or “You deserve better treatment than this!” These statements are all examples where people try too hard at getting others’ trust by using their emotions instead of logic when making judgments about others’ actions or behaviors (3). But these kinds of arguments don’t work because they don’t follow basic rules against circular reasoning; no matter how much sympathy we feel towards someone who’s having trouble managing his bills or paying rent (for example), there will always be other factors involved with those problems which cannot be ignored simply because they’re painful at first glance!

Appeal to Popularity / Peer Pressure

Appealing to popularity is a logical fallacy, which is also known as “arguing from authority.” This means that you appeal to someone’s opinion about something rather than using your own judgment. You might say, “Everyone loves this movie! It’s so good!” or “My friend said she loved this book.”

This type of argumentation can be used in everyday life too—for example: “Everyone I know loves coffee so much that they’ll drink it even when they’re sick.” Or: “My friend told me he likes ice cream all the time.” In these cases, the speaker isn’t necessarily wrong; however, there is some risk involved in making such an assertion based solely on one person’s opinion (especially if everyone isn’t treated equally).

The appeal-to-popularity fallacy also falls under the category of argumentum ad populum (“appeal to popularity”), which uses statistics and other indirect forms of evidence to persuade others into believing something true. For example: “There are more than six billion people alive today” may seem like solid reasoning until you realize that most population estimates tend towards seven billion humans being alive right now — meaning there could very well be over seven billion people by 2030!

Bandwagon Fallacy

The bandwagon fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone assumes that because “everyone” is doing or saying something, it must be right. This kind of argument makes no sense in the real world, but it’s still common among people who want to avoid responsibility for their actions.

For example: If you’re at a party and everyone else thinks that drinking alcohol is cool and fun, you might feel pressured into doing so as well. However, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why drinking alcohol isn’t good for your health—and even more reasons why drinking too much can actually kill you!

Bifurcation

Bifurcation is the mistake of assuming that an event is caused by two mutually exclusive events. This fallacy can be seen in statements like “the stock market crashed because of the economy.” The truth is that many factors contributed to the crash, including high interest rates and a variety of other factors.

Circumstantial Ad Hominem

Circumstantial Ad Hominem is a fallacy that occurs when you make an argument against someone’s character, motives or appearance without actually supporting your claims with evidence.

For example, let’s say that you see someone on the street wearing an outfit that makes them look like they just got out of prison. You might assume that this person has been convicted for a crime and therefore cannot be trusted to make good decisions about any issue at hand (e.g., buying health insurance). The problem with this line of reasoning is that it doesn’t really prove anything; all it does is insult people who were convicted for crimes in the past—and even then only if those convictions were later overturned by higher courts!

Composition Fallacy / Division Fallacy

The fallacy of composition is to assume that what is true of the parts of a whole must also be true of the whole. For example, if one out of three people you know has a cold, then it’s likely that everyone else in your family will become infected by it too!

The fallacy of division is to assume that what is true about one thing must also be true about its parts. For example, if I say “I have an apple” and you reply with “I have an orange instead!” then I know there’s no way you could possibly mean it literally; rather than do this to someone else (like those who use humor) try saying something like “You look fine today.” Or perhaps even better still: “Hmmm…maybe we should both go see our doctor?”

False Cause Fallacy / Non Causa Pro Causa / Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc / Questionable Cause / Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, or “after this, therefore because of this.” It’s a Latin phrase that means “after this, therefore because of this.” It’s an example of a logical fallacy in which the temporal sequence of events is mistaken for an actual causal relationship.

The fallacy was first discussed by Aristotle (384–322 BC) and Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), although it is unclear whether they were using it to describe other fallacies or just discussing pre-existing ideas about causation.

Gambler’s Fallacy / Monte Carlo Fallacy

The gambler’s fallacy is the belief that a streak of bad luck will continue, even though there is no reason for it. The gambler’s fallacy can be applied to many different situations:

• You think that your bad luck will continue, even though you have no control over what happens next. For example, if you’re playing basketball and miss an easy shot, it might seem like your streak of missed shots will continue into the next game—but this isn’t necessarily true!

• You think that a streak of good luck means that skill has come into play instead; this is also known as the “skill-based” version of the gambler’s fallacy (and luckily in this case there are some very specific ways we can tell whether our newfound skills are due to chance or skill). For example: If we’re playing darts and get lucky enough to throw darts into all seven bullseye targets before anyone else does during one round at dart league night (even though everyone else still has three throws left), then maybe we’re just getting better at throwing darts!

Genetic Fallacy

The genetic fallacy is the assumption that a claim is true because it has been used for a long time, or because it originates from an authority. It is also known as the appeal to tradition, or the appeal to antiquity.

In everyday life, this fallacy can be found in many different contexts: when you hear someone say “I don’t know” after being asked a question; when your mother tells you not to do something because she did/does/will do it; or even when people tell stories about their ancestors and how they lived before things changed so much over time (the sun never sets on our empire!).

Guilt by Association

Guilt by association is a fallacy that occurs when someone falsely claims that something is true because it has been associated with some other thing or person. The fallacy of guilt by association is often used in political campaigns, and can be applied to anything from the existence of God to whether or not you should eat your vegetables.

Guilt by innuendo refers to an implication made without explicitly stating it. For example, if someone says “I don’t know what happened,” they are implying that something did happen; but if they say “I don’t know what happened,” then their statement does not contain any such implication at all! This kind of misstatement doesn’t necessarily involve unproven facts—it just assumes them without actually saying so! It’s also called “guilt by implication” because there seems so much evidence for these claims as well… except maybe when we’re thinking about them more closely ourselves?

Hasty Generalization

Hasty generalization is a fallacy of faulty generalization. It occurs when you assume that the same logic or observation applies to all instances, when in fact it does not.

For example: “All women love cats” is an example of hasty generalization because it assumes that there must be something special about the above statement—namely, all women love cats—that makes it true for everyone who has ever lived or will live on Earth and throughout history (or even just Earth). In reality, if someone says they don’t like cats at all, then maybe they just don’t like them very much but still might have some reason why they prefer dogs instead…

Be aware that these kinds of mistakes can sneak into your thinking.

When you’re thinking about a new position or career move, it’s easy to become excited by the idea of a new challenge. When you’re feeling good about yourself and your abilities and have time on your hands, it is natural for us all to think positively about our future selves—but sometimes this optimism can lead us into making mistakes when we don’t know what we are doing.

We may think we know what we’re doing but still make mistakes anyway: We may be careless with our personal information online; take risks by sharing information with strangers; or even worse, post something offensive or inappropriate (the internet is not an anonymous space). These things happen all too often among people who share their lives online—and they can happen just as easily when talking face-to-face!

Conclusion

In this article, we have seen some of the most common fallacies in everyday life. We hope that by reading about them and understanding the reasoning behind them, you will be better equipped to recognize them in others when they occur. Also, remember that these are just guidelines for the most part—you should always use your own judgment as well as consulting a source from which you have reliable knowledge before making judgments.