ISAT Argument Evaluation and Flaws 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: 'Either you support this new law, or you want criminals to go free.' This statement is an example of:
- Hasty generalisation
- False dichotomy (Correct answer)
- Appeal to authority
- Post hoc reasoning
Correct answer: False dichotomy
A false dichotomy presents only two options when other alternatives exist.
Question 2: A study finds that cities with more hospitals have higher death rates. Which conclusion is most logically sound?
- Hospitals cause death
- Sicker people go to cities with more hospitals, explaining the correlation (Correct answer)
- The study proves hospitals are useless
- Death rates should be used to evaluate hospital quality
Correct answer: Sicker people go to cities with more hospitals, explaining the correlation
The higher death rates likely reflect that very ill patients congregate in cities with specialist hospitals, not that hospitals cause death.
Question 3: Which of the following best describes 'circular reasoning' (begging the question)?
- Using a premise that assumes the truth of the conclusion (Correct answer)
- Offering irrelevant information to distract from the main issue
- Drawing a sweeping conclusion from a single example
- Using emotional appeals instead of evidence
Correct answer: Using a premise that assumes the truth of the conclusion
Circular reasoning embeds the conclusion within the premises, making the argument self-referential rather than logically valid.
Question 4: An argument concludes that teenagers are irresponsible based on the actions of three teenagers in the news. This is best described as:
- False analogy
- Hasty generalisation (Correct answer)
- Ad hominem
- Slippery slope
Correct answer: Hasty generalisation
Drawing a broad conclusion from an unrepresentative or very small sample is a hasty generalisation.
Question 5: Which feature of an argument most directly indicates it contains a 'red herring'?
- A premise that contradicts the conclusion
- Information introduced that distracts from the actual issue being debated (Correct answer)
- A conclusion that goes beyond what the premises support
- Two premises that contradict each other
Correct answer: Information introduced that distracts from the actual issue being debated
A red herring introduces irrelevant information to divert attention away from the real point of contention.
Question 6: A school bans mobile phones and test scores improve the following term. A teacher concludes phones were hurting learning. Which evidence would most weaken this conclusion?
- Students reported feeling less distracted without phones
- A new, more experienced teacher joined the school the same term (Correct answer)
- The ban was popular with parents
- Mobile phone use was highest among lower-achieving students
Correct answer: A new, more experienced teacher joined the school the same term
A confounding variable—the arrival of a better teacher—provides an alternative explanation for the score improvement.
Question 7: Which of the following correctly identifies the flaw in this argument: 'Aspirin has been used for over a century, so it must be safe for everyone'?
- Appeal to tradition ignores that age of use does not prove universal safety (Correct answer)
- The argument is circular because it assumes what it sets out to prove
- The argument commits a false analogy
- The argument relies on an ad hominem attack
Correct answer: Appeal to tradition ignores that age of use does not prove universal safety
Longevity of use (appeal to tradition) does not establish safety for all individuals or all conditions.
ISAT Argument Evaluation and Flaws 4
'Either you support this new law, or you want criminals to go free.' This statement is an example of: