Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

53 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Too Narrow
The definition does not include all the items which should be included
Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased
Subverted Support
The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist
Existential Fallacy
a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises
Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise:
as the name implies
Fallacy of Exclusive Premises
a syllogism has two negative premises
Illicit Minor
the subject of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the subject
Illicit Major
the predicate of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the predicate
Undistributed Middle
two separate categories are said to be connected because they share a common property
Fallacy of Four Terms
a syllogism has four terms
asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true
Denying the Antecedent
any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B
Affirming the Consequent
any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A
because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property
because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property
the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says
the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
the same term is used with two different meanings
Straw Man
the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best argument
Irrelevant Conclusion
an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion
Begging the Question
the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
Complex Cause
the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect
Wrong Direction
the direction between cause and effect is reversed
one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect
Joint effect
one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause
Post Hoc
because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
Converse Accident
an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply
a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception
Fallacy of Exclusion
evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration
Slothful Induction
the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary
False Analogy
the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
Unrepresentative Sample
the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole
Hasty Generalization
the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population
Style Over Substance
the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion
Anonymous Authority
the authority in question is not named
Appeal to Authority
1. the authority is not an expert in the field; 2. experts in the field disagree; 3. the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious
Attacking the Person:
1. the person's character is attacked; 2. the person's circumstances are noted; 3. the person does not practise what is preached
a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true
Prejudicial Language
value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author
the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences
Appeal to Pity
the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy
Appeal to Force
the reader is persuaded to agree by force
Complex Question
two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition
Slippery Slope
a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
From Ignorance
because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
False Dilemma
two choices are given when in fact there are three options
Conflicting Conditions
The definition is self-contradictory
Circular Definition
The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition
Failure to Elucidate
The definition is more difficult to understand than the word or concept being defined
Too Broad
The definition includes items which should not be included
Limited Depth
The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes
Limited Scope
The theory which explains can only explain one thing
The theory which explains cannot be tested