INSTRUCTIONS: Select the answer that best characterizes each argument.
1. Mr. Quigley, who is a lobbyist for the oil industry, says that the government should subsidize oil exploration. In view of
Mr. Quigley’s credentials, it follows that the government should certainly do this.
a. False cause.
b. Appeal to unqualified authority.
c. No fallacy.
d. Begging the question.
e. Argument against the person, circumstantial.
2. Professor Smyth argues for the adoption of stronger standards covering food imported from China. But Smyth is a
disgusting leftist ex hippie who reportedly has sex with his female students. Smyth’s arguments are trash, just as he is.
a. Argument against the person, abusive.
b. Red herring.
c. Appeal to unqualified authority.
d. You, too (tu quoque).
e. No fallacy.
3. Every tile on this kitchen floor is light blue in color. Therefore, the entire floor is light blue in color.
a. Division.
b. Begging the question.
c. Composition.
d. Hasty generalization.
e. No fallacy.
4. Karen argues that it’s not right to post the photographs of convicted child molesters on the Internet. Obviously Karen
supports child molestation. But these monsters have completely ruined the lives of thousands of children. They can’t be
allowed to wreak their havoc any longer. Clearly, Karen’s argument is misguided.
a. Missing the point.
b. No fallacy.
c. Red herring.
d. Straw man.
e. Argument against the person, circumstantial.
5. Either you spend $200 on a pair of True Religion jeans, or everybody will think you’re out of style. It’s up to you.
a. Suppressed evidence.
b. Accident.
c. Appeal to force.
d. No fallacy.
e. False dichotomy.
6. Every member of the Viking Society was born in Norway. Therefore, the Viking Society was born in Norway.
a. No fallacy.