Flashcard library · Test Prep
LSAT: Logical Fallacies
This flashcard deck provides a concise overview of key logical fallacies frequently tested on the LSAT. Master these common errors in reasoning to identify flaws in arguments and strengthen your own critical thinking skills. Ideal for students aiming to improve their Logical Reasoning and Analytical Reasoning sections.
Want to actually learn these?
Create a free NoteFren account to study with spaced repetition, or turn your own notes into cards like these.
What is the Ad Hominem fallacy?
An Ad Hominem fallacy attacks the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making an argument, rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself.
Describe the Appeal to Authority fallacy.
This fallacy occurs when an argument relies on the opinion of an authority figure who is not an expert in the subject at hand, or when there's disagreement among experts.
What is the Appeal to Emotion fallacy?
An Appeal to Emotion attempts to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument, often by using pity, fear, or anger.
Explain Circular Reasoning.
Circular Reasoning, or Begging the Question, occurs when an argument's conclusion is assumed in the premise, offering no independent support for the conclusion.
Define the fallacy of Equivocation.
Equivocation is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning by deliberately shifting between meanings within an argument.
How does the Straw Man fallacy work?
The Straw Man fallacy misrepresents or exaggerates an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack, then refutes the distorted version instead of the actual argument.
What is the Slippery Slope fallacy?
A Slippery Slope argument asserts that a relatively small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related, usually negative, events culminating in some significant consequence, without sufficient evidence for this chain.
Explain Hasty Generalization.
Hasty Generalization occurs when a conclusion is drawn about an entire group or population based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.
What is the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy?
This 'false cause' fallacy assumes that because one event followed another, the first event must have caused the second, ignoring other possible causal factors.
Describe the Ad Populum (Bandwagon) fallacy.
The Ad Populum fallacy claims that an argument is true or valid simply because many people believe it, appealing to popularity rather than evidence.
What is a Red Herring fallacy?
A Red Herring introduces an irrelevant topic into an argument to divert attention from the original issue, intentionally misleading the audience.
Define Affirming the Consequent.
Affirming the Consequent is an invalid deductive inference that assumes if a conditional statement ('If P, then Q') is true and Q is true, then P must also be true.
What is the Denying the Antecedent fallacy?
Denying the Antecedent is an invalid deductive inference that assumes if a conditional statement ('If P, then Q') is true and P is false, then Q must also be false.
Explain the Flawed Analogy fallacy.
A Flawed Analogy occurs when an argument draws a comparison between two things that are not sufficiently similar in the relevant respects to warrant the conclusion drawn.
Differentiate between the Composition and Division fallacies.
Composition incorrectly assumes that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole. Division incorrectly assumes that what is true of the whole must be true of its parts.