The "This" Team Fallacy Quiz!

Explanation
The given statement is an example of a fallacious appeal to pity. The person is using the excuse of taking care of their sick dog as a way to gain sympathy and avoid facing the consequences of being late to work. However, this appeal to pity is not a valid justification for their lateness and does not provide any logical reasoning for why they should be excused.

Explanation
The given statement suggests that there is no point in volunteering at a homeless shelter because the problem of homelessness cannot be completely solved. This aligns with the concept of the Nirvana Fallacy, which refers to the logical error of comparing a realistic solution to an idealized one and concluding that the realistic solution is not worth pursuing. In this case, the statement implies that since the idealized solution of completely eradicating homelessness cannot be achieved, it is futile to invest time in volunteering.

Explanation
The given statement shows a hasty generalization because the person is making a broad assumption about everyone from Puerto Rico based on a limited observation of homeless people. This is an example of jumping to a conclusion without considering other factors or gathering enough evidence. It is a logical fallacy to assume that all people from Puerto Rico are poor just because the person encountered homeless individuals during their vacation.

Explanation
The correct answer is Fallacious Appeal to Pity. This is because the person is using their unfortunate circumstances (being sick, breaking up, internet and printer issues) as a way to gain sympathy and avoid taking responsibility for forgetting to do their online test. They are trying to manipulate others by making them feel sorry for them and hoping that it will excuse their actions. This is a fallacious argument because it does not address the actual issue at hand, which is their forgetfulness.

Explanation
The Nirvana Fallacy is the correct answer because it refers to the belief that if a solution or outcome is not perfect or ideal, then it is not worth pursuing at all. In this case, the statement suggests that voting is pointless because it will not result in the election of a politician who can balance the American budget. This is an example of the Nirvana Fallacy because it dismisses the value of voting based on the unrealistic expectation of a perfect outcome.

Explanation
The given statement is an example of a hasty generalization. The person is making a sweeping conclusion about all lawyers based on their limited experience with only a few lawyers involved in their parents' divorce. This conclusion is not supported by enough evidence and does not take into account the diversity and individuality of lawyers as a whole.