Argument Evaluation and Flaws Flashcards
7 cards from real ISAT practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Argument Evaluation and Flaws flashcards as text
A politician argues: 'Crime rates fell after we increased police patrols, so the patrols caused the drop.' Which flaw is present?
Answer: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Assuming that because one event followed another the first caused the second is the post hoc fallacy.
Which of the following best identifies a 'straw man' fallacy?
Answer: Misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack
A straw man fallacy involves distorting or exaggerating an opponent's position before refuting it.
A researcher concludes that a drug is safe because no side effects appeared in a 2-week trial on 10 patients. What is the main weakness?
Answer: The sample size and duration are too small to generalise
Ten patients over two weeks is an insufficient sample and time frame to draw broad safety conclusions.
'Everyone on social media says this diet works, so it must be effective.' This argument relies on which flaw?
Answer: Ad populum (appeal to popularity)
Appealing to the number of people who believe something (ad populum) does not establish truth.
An argument states: 'If we allow students to redo one test, they'll demand to redo every test forever.' This is an example of:
Answer: Slippery slope
The slippery slope fallacy assumes an initial action will inevitably lead to extreme consequences without adequate justification.
Which approach best strengthens a causal argument linking coffee consumption to improved memory?
Answer: Conducting a randomised controlled trial with a placebo group showing memory gains only in the coffee group
A randomised controlled trial with a placebo isolates the causal variable and provides the strongest causal evidence.
The argument 'You should trust my investment advice because I once lost all my money in bad investments and learned from it' appeals to which type of reasoning?
Answer: Appeal to experience as a legitimate credential
While experience can be relevant, the argument must still be evaluated on whether past failure genuinely provides credible expertise.