Straw man
Person A: "We should eat more fruits and vegetables to stay healthy."
Person B: "So you’re saying we should stop eating all other foods and only eat fruits and vegetables? That’s ridiculous!"
Is this argument fallacious?
Answer: Fallacious (Straw man) – Person B misrepresents Person A's point by exaggerating it.
Friend A: "You either support this policy, or you don’t care about the environment at all."
Answer: Fallacious (False Dilemma) – This oversimplifies by suggesting that opposing the policy means indifference to the environment, without considering other ways to support environmental causes.
Person A: "I believe we should implement stricter environmental regulations to reduce pollution."
Person B: "Well, you live in a rich neighborhood where pollution isn’t even a problem for you. Why should we trust your opinion on this?"
Answer: Fallacious (Ad Hominem) – Person B attacks Person A’s socioeconomic status instead of addressing the argument about environmental regulations.
Person A: "We need to reduce plastic waste to protect the environment."
Person B: "But think about how convenient plastic is for everyday use."
Answer: Fallacious (Red Herring) – Person B introduces the convenience of plastic, which is unrelated to the environmental issue Person A raised.
Person A: "Video games can help improve problem-solving skills."
Person B: "No way, video games just make people lazy."
Is this argument fallacious
Answer: Fallacious (Straw man) – Person B ignores the actual argument about problem-solving and focuses on something unrelated.
Politician: "We either take immediate action on climate change, or future generations will suffer the consequences."
Answer: Not fallacious – While urgent action is framed as crucial, this is more of a realistic dichotomy based on scientific consensus, rather than an oversimplified dilemma.
Scientist A: "Research shows that vaccines are safe and effective."
Person B: "You’re just saying that because you’re funded by pharmaceutical companies."
Answer: Fallacious (Ad Hominem) – Attacking Scientist A's source of funding rather than addressing the evidence or argument about vaccine safety is an ad hominem.
Person A: "We should raise the minimum wage to help low-income workers."
Person B: "But what about the fact that some people don’t even want to work?"
Answer: Fallacious (Red Herring) – Person B shifts the discussion to a different issue (people not wanting to work) rather than addressing the argument about raising the minimum wage.
Person A: "We should invest more in public transportation."
Person B: "You think we should just stop fixing roads and let everyone walk everywhere?"
Is this argument fallacious?
Answer: Fallacious (Straw man) – Person B distorts the argument by implying that Person A wants to eliminate road repairs, which wasn't said.
Coach: "If we don’t practice every day, we’ll never win the championship."
Answer: Fallacious (False Dilemma) – This assumes daily practice is the only path to success, disregarding other factors like strategy, teamwork, or talent.
Person A: "Our town needs to allocate more funds to education."
Person B: "Maybe, but given your involvement in the local teachers' union, it's hard to see your argument as unbiased."
Answer: Not fallacious – Person B is questioning a potential bias due to Person A’s affiliation, which is a relevant concern when discussing funding, but they are not attacking Person A’s character.
Person A: "We should improve our healthcare system to make it more affordable."
Person B: "I agree, but we also need to focus on improving education since it affects long-term economic growth."
Answer: Not fallacious – Person B expands on the conversation by introducing education as another important issue without derailing the core argument about healthcare.
Person A: "Homework is important because it helps students practice what they learn."
Person B: "I agree. Homework allows students to reinforce their skills outside of class."
Is this argument fallacious?
Answer: Not fallacious – Person B agrees with and accurately represents Person A's statement.
Teacher: "You can either study hard and get good grades, or you’ll fail the class."
Answer: Fallacious (False Dilemma) – The teacher ignores other possibilities like doing well through tutoring, group work, or improving later in the term.
Person A: "We should regulate the pharmaceutical industry more strictly."
Person B: "Your argument is flawed because you’re not even a doctor."
Answer: Fallacious (Ad Hominem) – Person B attacks Person A’s lack of qualifications instead of engaging with the argument about regulation.
Person A: "We should raise the minimum wage to help low-income workers."
Person B: "But what about the fact that some people don’t even want to work?"
Answer: Fallacious (Red Herring) – Person B shifts the discussion to a different issue (people not wanting to work) rather than addressing the argument about raising the minimum wage.
Person A: "We need to find ways to reduce pollution from cars."
Person B: "Oh, so you think everyone should stop driving and we should ban all cars immediately? That’s extreme."
is this argument fallacious?
Answer: Fallacious (Straw man) – Person B exaggerates Person A’s position, making it seem more extreme than it is.
Parent: "If you don’t eat your vegetables, you won’t grow strong."
Answer: Not fallacious – While there are other factors that affect growth, this is a general truth, not an oversimplified either/or fallacy.
Person A: "I believe we should cut military spending."
Person B: "That's easy for you to say, given that you’ve never served in the military or faced any real danger."
Answer: Fallacious (Ad Hominem) – Person B dismisses the argument by attacking Person A's lack of personal military experience, rather than addressing the substance of the claim about cutting military spending.
Person A: "We should focus on reducing childhood obesity by promoting healthier diets in schools."
Person B: "That’s important, but aren’t you concerned about the rising costs of healthcare?"
Answer: Fallacious (Red Herring) – Person B shifts the conversation to healthcare costs, which is a different issue from the specific concern of childhood obesity and school diets.