X
Logical  Fallacy: a error in reasoning
  (adj)     (noun)

(beta)
List Of Fallacies
Play More
Score:
0


About This Game

Feedback Here
Or On Facebook

Statement #16 Discussion

0 comments
All Discussions

Below is the statement as it appears with the fallacy marked as correct. You can see the totals of most frequent responses to this statement. And after reading the any discussion going on below, you can select your choice(s) for the correct answer. For now, whoever posts each statement can update corrections.
It was nearly ten years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history.
Misleading Vividness
Category: Fallacies of Relevance (Red Herrings) → Distracting Appeals

Misleading Vividness is a fallacy in which a very small number of particularly dramatic events are taken to outweigh a significant amount of statistical evidence. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

  1. Dramatic or vivid event X occurs (and is not in accord with the majority of the statistical evidence).
  2. Therefore events of type X are likely to occur.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the mere fact that an event is particularly vivid or dramatic does not make the event more likely to occur, especially in the face of significant statistical evidence.

People often accept this sort of "reasoning" because particularly vivid or dramatic cases tend to make a very strong impression on the human mind. For example, if a person survives a particularly awful plane crash, he might be inclined to believe that air travel is more dangerous than other forms of travel. After all, explosions and people dying around him will have a more significant impact on his mind than will the rather dull statistics that a person is more likely to be struck by lightning than killed in a plane crash.

It should be kept in mind that taking into account the possibility of something dramatic or vivid occurring is not always fallacious. For example, a person might decide to never go sky diving because the effects of an accident can be very, very dramatic. If he knows that, statistically, the chances of the accident are happening are very low but he considers even a small risk to be unacceptable, then he would not be making an error in reasoning.

Click For Fallacy Description

 1,409 Total Answer Attempts   54%
 767 Correctly Popped Fallacies
 642 Incorrectly Un/Popped
posted by wikiworldorder     url: youtube/m2TI...

Most Common Responses

 
767 - Misleading Vividness
109 - Appeal to Emotion
83 - Appeal to Fear
47 - Appeal to Pity
35 - Special Pleading
20 - Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief
20 - Biased Generalization
19 - Appeal to Belief
19 - Appeal to Spite
18 - Post Hoc
17 - Burden of Proof
17 - Red Herring
17 - Begging the Question
15 - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
15 - Appeal to Common Practice
14 - Hasty Generalization
14 - Relativist Fallacy
14 - Appeal to Novelty
14 - Confusing Cause and Effect
13 - Poisoning the Well
13 - False Dilemma
12 - Appeal to Tradition
12 - Appeal to Popularity
11 - Circumstantial Ad Hominem
9 - Ignoring a Common Cause
9 - Fallacy of Composition
8 - Personal Attack
7 - Slippery Slope
7 - Ad Hominem
6 - Middle Ground
6 - Appeal to Ridicule
4 - Guilt by Association
4 - Appeal to Flattery
4 - Appeal to Authority
3 - Fallacy of Division
3 - Peer Pressure
2 - Genetic Fallacy
1 -
1 - Gambler's Fallacy

Likes for Correct Answers

Show all on page ↑

+









Play Game - Fallacy List - Add Statements - Player Collections - Discussions

Login - High Scores - About - Trivium - Links - Contact

Donate To DontFallacy.Me - Support Dr. Labossiere

Creative Commons, 2014, Wiki World Order (Morgan Lesko)


* Fallacious statements are usually paired with a random image of a person who never spoke those words.
This free site is for educational purposes, studying intellectual dishonesty. The images are being used under fair use. Sunflower by robstephaustrali. Obama Pop Up image owned by Gnostic Media.