Azend Coaching

Flaws

There are about 20 common flaws - ish. This is not an exhaustive list, but getting familiar with these flaws will do you well!

Remember, if an argument is not air tight, it is flawed.

You can toggle to see an example of the flaw or what corresponding answer choices might say. (There are several ways to characterize these flaws in your answer choice.)

Focusing on the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. Attacks: Behavior, Motives, Character
The mayor wants to raise taxes. But it is well known that the mayor stands to benefit from raised taxes, so we should reject the mayor's proposal.

Mischaracterizing the viewpoint of another to make it easier to attack. Putting words in another's mouth
Politician A: We should liberalize the laws on marijuana. Politician B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its collective work ethic in favor of instant gratification.

Appealing to an improper authority. Note: Some authorities do provide expert opinions, but in other instances, that authority's opinion may be irrelevant.
Though the jury determined there was not enough evidence to convict Craig, Craig must be guilty of the crime. Otherwise, the county prosecutor would not have charged Craig with a crime.

Popular opinion does not provide a logical basis for an argument.
A passenger became sick mid-flight, though they did not require immediate medical attention. Since an overwhelming majority of all adult passengers elected to continue on towards their destination, it was not wrong for the pilot to avert a mid-flight stop to the closest hospital.

Conclusions are supposed to follow logically, not just emotionally.
The student body President, when asked by the school newspaper to address concerns of corruption among the student body, was quoted as saying, "Corruption is a terrible thing. No student wants to look back on these glorious years and recall the tarnish of the student body's knack for favoritism and bribery. It's time we recall the student body.

At some point, all analogies break down. No matter how much you try to compare things - and not matter how alike two things are - eventually, those two things will be fundamentally different in some respect.
It can be quite terrifying to ask another out on a date. Nevertheless, it's almost always a risk worth taking. Like skydiving, you just have to take that jump. While it may appear frightening at first, very, very few skydivers experience complications.

Assumes there are only two choices when indeed there may be more.
Ant General: The termites have unveiled plans to invade our colony unless we cede some of our territory along the edge of the garden. We can either do nothing and watch as the termites claim our rightful territory or we can stand up and fight. Doing nothing is not an option, come hell or high water. So we must send our best soldiers into battle.

A lack of evidence for a claim does not make that claim false, nor does even a strong attack against that claim. There are 4 kinds: Weakened ≠ False Strengthen ≠ True Lack of evidence for ≠ False Lack of evidence against ≠ True
No one has ever reported witnessing Katy kiss a girl and liking it. It stands to reason that Ms. Katy Perry has actually never kissed a girl and liked it.

The Premises = The Conclusion The author believes the conclusion by using a premise that basically restates the conclusion. The author has provided no real support for the argument.
The ban we have imposed on public smoking is needed to protect and promote public health, though critics have argued that the city's ban is unnecessary, these critics are clearly wrong. We know this because promoting public health requires banning smoking in public areas.

The premises will literally contradict each other. Or the conclusion.
While our democracy has always acted responsibly, I cannot consent to these taxes. No responsible government would suppress free speech given that open debate is essential to democracy. Since our democracy consistently supresses free speech, I cannot support it financially in any way.

Making broad conclusions based on too few instances. That will typically be 1, 2, or 3 instances (though some questions have more instances, but too few for the sweeping claim made in the conclusion)
Two of my friends were given incorrect change at that store. That store probably shortchanges most shoppers.

The survey sample may be unrepresentative of the designated group. Watch for shifts in the group mentioned in the premise versus the conclusion. Additionally, the survey itself may be faulty, have faulty questions, or responses to the survey may not have been truthful or accurate. Remember, a survey in and of itself isn't automaticallyh a flaw, so you have to spot how the survey goes wrong.
Early in the 1930s, pollsters called Americans from all over the country, registering who they would vote for in the upcoming election. By a wide margin, respondents said they would vote for Hoover. So, the pollsters claimed, Hoover would go on to win the election of 1932.* *He didn't.

What is true of the parts of a group isn't necessarily true of the group as a whole, and what is true of a whole group isn't necessarily true of the pieces that make up that group.
Gas prices have gone up steadily over the past few years. Thus, the cost of car ownership is higher than it was previously.

Confuses increases or decreases in percentages with changes in absolute numbers or fails to distinguish between the two. These two may both go up together or down together or one may increase while the other decreases. You may have a larger slice of the pie while still having less pie than before.
The rug market in Europe is competitive. So Rugs-R-Us must have suffered greatly when their market share fell from 50% to 5% over the past year. They must have lost 90 percent of their annual revenue.

A word or phrase shifts meaning throughout the argument, leading to equivocation. Pay close attention to parallels in wording and watch how they may be differently defined.
Board Member: If this company is going to maximize its profits in the coming year, we need to fully exploit all of our available resources. Human Resources Director: Not so fast. Our employees are one of our most valued resources, and we have a strict policy against exploiting our workers.

Confuses necessary conditions with sufficient conditions, or vice versa. Something may be required, and yet not strong enough to guarantee something else. Something may be powerful enough to guanrantee something else, and yet still not be necessary to make that thing happen.
In the search for life, scientists often first search for water given that without water, life stands no chance. So there must be life on Mars since these same scientists have recently discovered water on Mars.

There are many areas where cause and effect arguments can go wrong. Here are some: Assuming correlation implies causation Assuming a temporal relationship infers a causal one There may be an alternative cause for the stated effect May be a root cause that caused both the cause & effect The relationship may be reversed: E ➡️ C
Independent: "It should come as no great surprise that a Political Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them. That is why the Political Party in question lost the recent election."

The premises provided do not actually support the conclusion. Represents a big jump connecting ideas that aren't related by any stretch of the imagination. You can ask your self sort of, "So what?"
Ethicist: Art can be inclusive if it depict folks from all walks of life, and not just in a positive or negative light. Sometimes, for example, some people who have disabilities are bad people, not because of their disability, of course, but because of their poor character. It's important all groups are portrayed realistically, inclusive of the good and the bad. For this reason, the state legislature should increase the amount it dedicates to public schools.

Confuses relative properties (better, stronger) with absolute ones (good, strong). Just because it's better does not mean it's good. Just because it's good does not mean it's better.
My Pikachu is a stronger fighter than your Pikachu. It can run faster, it can outthink yours, it is also more agile and determined to win. So my Pikachu is a good fighter.

Confuses descriptive statements (what is) with prescriptive ones (what ought to be). Remember: should, ought, must are one thing (often described as a question of ethics), whereas what actually is happening in the world is another thing entirely (often called a question of ontology) Just because it is, doesn't mean it ought to be. Just because it ought to be, doesn't mean it is (happening)
The house is on fire and my beloved goose is in the house. I have given it a name, taught it to fly, and did not raise it to have cooked. Therefore, we should put the fire out.

Assumes that because something is possible, it must happen, or because something is not certain, it won't happen. Just because it can, doesn't mean it will Just because it can, doesn't mean it must Just because it's possible, doesn't mean it's certain Just because it's likely to happen, doesn't mean it will
According to climate scientists, sea levels are likely to rise significantly if the earth's average annual temperature increases 2 or more degrees Celcius. Assuming that climate scientists are right in this case, the sea levels will rise significantly given that for the past several years the average annual temperature has increased 3 degrees Celcius.

Assumes conditions will remain the same over time.
My dog Sheen has always greeted me when I come home. So, I know he'll greet me happily today.

After you're done studying, try out this game to test your knowledge.