# The Fallacy Game - Meeks

Approved & Edited by ProProfs Editorial Team
The editorial team at ProProfs Quizzes consists of a select group of subject experts, trivia writers, and quiz masters who have authored over 10,000 quizzes taken by more than 100 million users. This team includes our in-house seasoned quiz moderators and subject matter experts. Our editorial experts, spread across the world, are rigorously trained using our comprehensive guidelines to ensure that you receive the highest quality quizzes.
| By Lmkmeeks
L
Lmkmeeks
Community Contributor
Quizzes Created: 1 | Total Attempts: 216
Questions: 23 | Attempts: 216

Settings

This is a quiz game designed to teach students how to identify logical fallacies in an argument. The fallacies covered are: Begging the Question, Ad Hominem (Personal Attack), Either/Or, Red Herring, Equivocation, Slippery Slope, Appeal to Authority, Ad Populum, Wishful Thinking, Glittering Generalities, Explaining by Naming, Search for the Perfect Solution, Appeal to Emotion.

• 1.

### Defense Attorney:  This young man could not possibly have killed his parents, because he is now an orphan.

• A.

Red Herring

• B.

Circular Reasoning/Begging the Question

• C.

Bandwagon

• D.

Appeal to Emotion

B. Circular Reasoning/Begging the Question
Explanation
This is an example of circular logic because the defense is arguing that the boy can't have killed his parents, because their death makes him an orphan.

Rate this question:

• 2.

### …[I]f once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination. Once begin upon this downward path, you never know where you are to stop. Many a man has dated his ruin from some murder or other that perhaps he thought little of at the time.

• A.

Either/Or

• B.

Slippery Slope

• C.

Equivocation

• D.

Red Herring

B. Slippery Slope
Explanation
This type is based upon the claim that a controversial type of action will lead inevitably to some admittedly bad type of action. It is the slide from A to Z via the intermediate steps B through Y that is the "slope", and the smallness of each step that makes it "slippery".

This type of argument is by no means invariably fallacious, but the strength of the argument is inversely proportional to the number of steps between A and Z, and directly proportional to the causal strength of the connections between adjacent steps. If there are many intervening steps, and the causal connections between them are weak, or even unknown, then the resulting argument will be very weak, if not downright fallacious.

Rate this question:

• 3.

### Gerda Reith is convinced that superstition can be a positive force. "It gives you a sense of control by making you think you can work out what's going to happen next," she says. "And it also makes you feel lucky. And to take a risk or to enter into a chancy situation, you really have to believe in your own luck. In that sense, it's a very useful way of thinking, because the alternative is fatalism, which is to say, 'Oh, there's nothing I can do.' At least superstition makes people do things."

• A.

Red Herring

• B.

Weak Analogy

• C.

Equivocation

• D.

Either/or fallacy

D. Either/or fallacy
Explanation
The problem with this fallacy is not formal, but is found in its disjunctiveâ€”"either-or"â€”premise: an argument of this type is fallacious when its disjunctive premise is fallaciously supported.

Rate this question:

• 4.

### "We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous."

• A.

Red Herring

• B.

Weak Analogy

• C.

Equivocation

• D.

Circular Reasoning

A. Red Herring
Explanation
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. Topic A is under discussion.
2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3. Topic A is abandoned.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

Rate this question:

• 5.

### A feather is light.What is light cannot be dark.Therefore, a feather cannot be dark.

• A.

Equivocation

• B.

Appeal to Emotion

• C.

Slippery Slope

• D.

Search for the Perfect Solution

A. Equivocation
Explanation
In this use of equivocation, the word "light" is first used as the opposite of "heavy", but then used as a synonym of "bright" (the fallacy usually becomes obvious as soon as one tries to translate this argument into another language). Because the "middle term" of this syllogism is not one term, but two separate ones masquerading as one (all feathers are indeed "not heavy", but it is not true that all feathers are "bright"), this type of equivocation is actually an example of the fallacy of four terms.

Rate this question:

• 6.

### Bill and Jill are arguing about cleaning out their closets:Jill: "We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit messy."Bill: "Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have to clean them out everyday?"Jill: "I never said anything about cleaning them out every day. You just want too keep all your junk forever, which is just ridiculous."

• A.

• B.

Hasty Generalization

• C.

• D.

Straw Man

D. Straw Man
Explanation
The correct answer is Straw Man. In this argument, Bill misrepresents Jill's argument by suggesting that she wants to clean out the closets every day, which she never stated. He then attacks this exaggerated version of her argument as ridiculous. This is an example of a straw man fallacy, where one person distorts the other person's argument to make it easier to attack.

Rate this question:

• 7.

### Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year." Senator Bill: "Why?"Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."

Either/Or, False Dilemma
Explanation
The given answer is "Either/Or, False Dilemma" because Senator Jill presents a false dilemma by suggesting that the only options are to either cut education funding or live with a huge deficit. This is a false dilemma because there may be other alternatives or solutions to address the deficit without sacrificing education funding. The answer highlights the logical fallacy of presenting only two options when there could be more possibilities.

Rate this question:

• 8.

### We should move to the midwest because the Wall Street Journal says the cost of living is cheaper there.

• A.

Begging the question

• B.

Either/or

• C.

Appeal to popularity

• D.

Slippery slope

C. Appeal to popularity
Explanation
Appeal to authority is when you try to make your point by attaching it to someone whose opinions or knowledge are respected, instead of arguing it on its own merits. An appeal to tradition is similar, except instead of an authority, you rely on what's familiar and comfortable.

Rate this question:

• 9.

### Being overweight leads to a shortened lifespan because it's unhealthy.

• A.

Wishful thinking

• B.

Glittering generalities

• C.

Begging the question

• D.

Appeal to authority

C. Begging the question
Explanation
Begging the question is also known as a circular argument. It means you try to back up your point, but what you say to back it up also needs some kind of explanation or justification.

Rate this question:

• 10.

### Animal rights activists believe that we shouldn't keep animals captive and make them do our will. They would have you abandon your pets in the wilderness.

• A.

Straw man

• B.

Red herring

• C.

Begging the question

• D.

Appeal to emotion

A. Straw man
Explanation
Straw man is when you set up the opposing side to look unreasonable by misrepresenting what they actually stand for. There is also appeal to emotion

Rate this question:

• 11.

### "I would not recommend hiring that contractor because he did a lousy job on my friends’ house" is an example of

• A.

Explaining by naming

• B.

Glittering generalities

• C.

• D.

B. Glittering generalities
Explanation
This is a glittering generalities because the word lousy describes the work and not the person or the person's character.

Rate this question:

• 12.

### Name the fallacy. Those who say that extra-sensory perception is not reliable are mistaken. The police, Hollywood stars, and politicians have all relied on it.

• A.

• B.

Red herring

• C.

Appeal to authority

• D.

Explaining by naming

Explanation
The given statement is an example of the fallacy of ad populum. This fallacy occurs when someone argues that a claim must be true because many people believe it or because it is popular. In this case, the argument suggests that extra-sensory perception is reliable because the police, Hollywood stars, and politicians have relied on it. However, the reliability of a belief or practice cannot be determined solely based on the number of people who believe in it or use it.

Rate this question:

• 13.

### Name the fallacy. I ought always to do what is right. I have a right to say what I think. Therefore, I ought always to say what I think.

• A.

• B.

Equivocation

• C.

Explaining by naming

• D.

Red herring

B. Equivocation
Explanation
The fallacy in this statement is equivocation. Equivocation occurs when a term is used in different senses within the same argument, leading to a false or misleading conclusion. In this case, the term "right" is used in two different senses - one referring to moral correctness and the other referring to a legal entitlement. Therefore, the argument is flawed because it incorrectly assumes that the two uses of "right" are interchangeable and that what is morally right should always be said.

Rate this question:

• 14.

### Many people criticize Thomas Jefferson for being an owner of slaves. But Jefferson was one of our greatest presidents, and his Declaration of Independence is one of the most eloquent pleas for freedom and democracy ever written. Clearly these criticisms are unwarranted.

• A.

False Cause

• B.

Red Herring

• C.

Appeal to Authority

• D.

Straw Man

B. Red Herring
Explanation
It is Red Herring becasue it changes the subject and brings in another issue. (Subject is changed from Jefferson owning slaves to his writing the Declaration of Independence.) It is not Straw Man becasue the issue was inflated or exaggerated prior to bringing in a new issue.

Rate this question:

• 15.

### The Soviet Union collapsed after taking up atheism. Therefore, we must avoid atheism for the same reasons.

• A.

Questionable Use of Statistics

• B.

Equivocation

• C.

Straw Man

• D.

False Cause/Either-Or

D. False Cause/Either-Or
Explanation
This answer suggests that the argument is committing the logical fallacy of False Cause/Either-Or. The argument assumes that because the Soviet Union collapsed after adopting atheism, atheism must be avoided for the same reasons. However, this is a false cause fallacy as it assumes a causal relationship between atheism and the collapse of the Soviet Union without considering other possible factors. Additionally, it presents a false either-or scenario by suggesting that the only options are to adopt atheism or avoid it, without considering other possibilities.

Rate this question:

• 16.

### Coach says that a curfew is not needed since his players should know how to take care of themselves physically.

• A.

• B.

Explaining by naming

• C.

Wishful thinking

• D.

Appeal to authority

C. Wishful thinking
Explanation
The coach's statement that a curfew is not needed because his players should know how to take care of themselves physically suggests wishful thinking. It implies that the players will always make responsible choices and take care of themselves without any external rules or restrictions. However, this assumption may not be realistic, as individuals may have different levels of self-discipline and may benefit from the structure and accountability provided by a curfew.

Rate this question:

• 17.

### Coach claimed that he did not remember what the athletic director had just said because he had a "senior moment."

• A.

Explaining by naming

• B.

Glittering generalities

• C.

Red herring

• D.

Appeal to emotion

A. Explaining by naming
Explanation
The coach is using the phrase "senior moment" as an explanation for why he does not remember what the athletic director said. This is an example of explaining by naming, as he is attributing his forgetfulness to a commonly understood term associated with memory lapses in older individuals.

Rate this question:

• 18.

### Coach said to possible supporters, "We have the greatest team ever and it deserves your support."

• A.

Straw man

• B.

Appeal to authority

• C.

• D.

Glittering generalities

D. Glittering generalities
Explanation
The coach's statement is an example of glittering generalities because it uses vague and positive language to make the team sound great without providing any specific evidence or details. The coach is appealing to the emotions and aspirations of the possible supporters by using words like "greatest" and "deserves your support," but without giving any concrete reasons or facts to support the claim. This technique is often used in advertising and propaganda to manipulate people's emotions and create a positive image without actually providing substantial evidence.

Rate this question:

• 19.

### I stand for freedom: for a strong nation, unrivaled in the world. My opponent believes we must compromise on these ideals, but I believe they are our birthright.

• A.

Explaining by Naming

• B.

• C.

Appeal to Authority

• D.

Glittering generalities

A. Explaining by Naming
Explanation
The correct answer is "Explaining by Naming". This is because the statement categorizes the opponent's beliefs as compromising on ideals, while the speaker's beliefs are described as a birthright. By using these labels, the speaker aims to create a positive association with their own beliefs and a negative association with the opponent's beliefs.

Rate this question:

• 20.

### If I wouldn't get fat, I could eat all the Pop-tarts I wanted!

• A.

Appeal to popularity

• B.

Appeal to emotion

• C.

Wishful thinking

• D.

Explaining by naming

C. Wishful thinking
Explanation
The statement suggests that the person desires to eat as many Pop-tarts as they want without the consequence of getting fat. This reflects wishful thinking, as it is an unrealistic and idealistic desire that goes against the reality of gaining weight from excessive consumption.

Rate this question:

• 21.

### Sue - What would make a person go into a church and kill people?Bob - They are psycho!

• A.

Either/Or

• B.

• C.

Appeal to emotion

• D.

Explaining by naming

A. Either/Or
Explanation
The given conversation suggests that there are two possible options or explanations for why a person would go into a church and kill people. This aligns with the concept of "Either/Or," which refers to presenting only two options or possibilities when there may be more. The conversation does not provide any specific evidence or reasoning, but simply presents two broad possibilities without considering other potential factors.

Rate this question:

• 22.

### Sue - I really believe we should have free tuition for everyone.  Education can change our society.Bob - You don't know anything about education!  You didn't even finish High School!

• A.

• B.

Straw Man

• C.

Red Herring

• D.

Appeal to Emotion

Explanation
The correct answer is Ad hominem. Ad hominem is a logical fallacy where instead of addressing the argument or issue at hand, the person attacking the argument attacks the person making the argument. In this conversation, Bob disregards Sue's opinion on free tuition by attacking her personally, stating that she didn't finish high school and therefore doesn't know anything about education. This is an example of an ad hominem attack because Bob is not addressing Sue's argument, but rather attacking her personally.

Rate this question:

• 23.

### Sue - We should have guns allowed on campus.  It will give everyone a chance to protect themselves in case of an active shooter.Bob - Guns on campus!  What will happens when someone has to bring their child to school because they can't afford child care and their child gets shot.  Are you okay with people shooting children because someone can't afford child care?

• A.

Appeal to Emotion

• B.

Straw Man

• C.

Appeal to Popularity

• D.

Red Herring

B. Straw Man
Explanation
This is a Straw Man fallacy because the argument has been exaggerated. It also has Appeal to Emotion because it talks about the shooting of a child. But, the original issue, "Guns on Campus" has now been distracted by introducing child care.

Rate this question:

Quiz Review Timeline +

Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.

• Current Version
• May 31, 2023
Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team
• Mar 24, 2017
Quiz Created by
Lmkmeeks

Related Topics