Statement #o66 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. |


Fallacy of Composition
Category: Fallacies of Ambiguity The fallacy of Composition is committed when a conclusion is drawn about a whole based on the features of its constituents when, in fact, no justification provided for the inference. There are actually two types of this fallacy, both of which are known by the same name (because of the high degree of similarity). The first type of fallacy of Composition arises when a person reasons from the characteristics of individual members of a class or group to a conclusion regarding the characteristics of the entire class or group (taken as a whole). More formally, the "reasoning" would look something like this.
It is important to note that drawing an inference about the characteristics of a class based on the characteristics of its individual members is not always fallacious. In some cases, sufficient justification can be provided to warrant the conclusion. For example, it is true that an individual rich person has more wealth than an individual poor person. In some nations (such as the US) it is true that the class of wealthy people has more wealth as a whole than does the class of poor people. In this case, the evidence used would warrant the inference and the fallacy of Composition would not be committed. The second type of fallacy of Composition is committed when it is concluded that what is true of the parts of a whole must be true of the whole without there being adequate justification for the claim. More formally, the line of "reasoning" would be as follows:
![]() |
1,016 Total Answer Attempts 59%
595 Correctly Popped Fallacies
421 Incorrectly Un/Popped


Most Common Responses34 - Hasty Generalization 30 - False Dilemma 29 - Confusing Cause and Effect 23 - Biased Generalization 22 - Fallacy of Division 20 - Slippery Slope 15 - Relativist Fallacy 15 - Red Herring 14 - Appeal to Flattery 14 - Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief 13 - Post Hoc 13 - Ignoring a Common Cause 13 - Misleading Vividness 13 - Begging the Question 12 - Poisoning the Well 11 - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque 11 - Circumstantial Ad Hominem 11 - Appeal to Popularity 10 - Genetic Fallacy 10 - Guilt by Association 9 - Gambler's Fallacy 9 - Appeal to Ridicule 8 - Appeal to Spite 8 - Burden of Proof 7 - Appeal to Belief 7 - Ad Hominem 6 - Middle Ground 6 - Special Pleading 6 - Personal Attack 6 - Peer Pressure 5 - Appeal to Novelty 3 - Appeal to Emotion 2 - Appeal to Common Practice 2 - Appeal to Authority 1 - 1 - Appeal to Fear 1 - Appeal to Tradition 1 - Appeal to Pity |
+ |
Login - High Scores - About - Trivium - Links - Contact
Donate To DontFallacy.Me - Support Dr. Labossiere
* 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. French News Anchor image owned by LCI.