Emotional and Ethical Fallacies Quiz

Study Notes

Sentimental Appeals: Manipulate emotions to divert attention from factual analysis.
Red Herrings: Introduce irrelevant topics or evidence to mislead and confuse the audience.
Scare Tactics: Use fear to persuade, threatening dire consequences to gain agreement.
Bandwagon Appeals: Suggest that acceptance should occur because "everyone else" agrees.
Slippery Slope: Argue that a single action will inevitably lead to severe, unintended consequences.
Either/Or Choices: Oversimplify complex issues into only two alternatives, ignoring other possibilities.
False Need: Create a desire for unnecessary products or services, persuading the audience to feel they must have them.

False Authority: Leverage an individual's status to validate claims without substantiating evidence or qualifications.
Using Authority Instead of Evidence: Rely on personal authority rather than actual proof to back assertions.
Guilt by Association: Question someone's credibility or character based on their associates rather than their own merits.
Dogmatism: Present personal beliefs as the only acceptable stance, discouraging alternative viewpoints.
Moral Equivalence: Draw parallels between minor issues and serious offenses, trivializing significant matters.
Ad Hominem: Attack the character of the opponent instead of addressing the argument itself.
Strawperson: Misrepresent or simplify an opponent's argument to easily refute it, creating a false sense of victory.

Hasty Generalization: Form conclusions based on insufficient or weak evidence.
Faulty Casualty (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc): Confuse correlation with causation, suggesting one event caused another simply because it preceded it.
Non Sequitur: Present a conclusion that does not logically follow from the previous statements.
Equivocation: Use ambiguous language to mislead, offering a partial truth that obscures the whole truth.
Begging the Question: Create circular arguments by restating the claim with no additional support or evidence.
Faulty Analogy: Draw misleading or inappropriate comparisons between two items that are not truly alike.
Stacked Evidence: Present only one side of an argument to create a distorted view of the issue, ignoring counterarguments.