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 #o74 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.
"A living cell is organic material, so the chemicals making up the cell must also be organic material."
Fallacy of Division
Category: Fallacies of Ambiguity

The fallacy of Division is committed when a person infers that what is true of a whole must also be true of its constituents and justification for that inference is not provided. There are two main variants of the general fallacy of Division:

The first type of fallacy of Division is committed when 1) a person reasons that what is true of the whole must also be true of the parts and 2) the person fails to justify that inference with the required degree of evidence. More formally, the "reasoning" follows this sort of pattern:

  1. The whole, X, has properties A, B, C, etc.
  2. Therefore the parts of X have properties A,B,C, etc.
That this line of reasoning is fallacious is made clear by the following case: 4 is an even number. 1 and 3 are parts of 4. Therefore 1 and 3 are even.

It should be noted that it is not always fallacious to draw a conclusion about the parts of a whole based on the properties of the whole. As long as adequate evidence is provided in the argument, the reasoning can be acceptable. For example, the human body is made out of matter and it is reasonable to infer from this that the parts that make up the human body are also made out of matter. This is because there is no reason to believe that the body is made up of nonā€material parts that somehow form matter when they get together.

The second version of the fallacy of division is committed when a person 1) draws a conclusion about the properties of individual members of a class or group based on the collective properties of the class or group and 2) there is not enough justification for the conclusion. More formally, the line of "reasoning" is as follows:

  1. As a collective, group or class X has properties A,B,C, etc.
  2. Therefore the individual members of group or class X have properties A,B,C, etc.
That this sort of reasoning is fallacious can be easily shown by the following: It is true that athletes, taken as a group, are football players, track runners, swimmers, tennis players, long jumpers, pole vaulters and such. But it would be fallacious to infer that each individual athlete is a football player, a track runner, a swimmer, a tennis player, a swimmer, etc.

It should be noted that it is not always fallacious to draw a conclusion about an individual based on what is true of the class he/she/it belongs to. If the inference is backed by evidence, then the reasoning can be fine. For example, it is not fallacious to infer that Bill the Siamese cat is a mammal from the fact that all cats are mammals. In this case, what is true of the class is also true of each individual member.

Click For Fallacy Description

 1,171 Total Answer Attempts   54%
 633 Correctly Popped Fallacies
 538 Incorrectly Un/Popped
( Random Image )

Most Common Responses

 
633 - Fallacy of Division
64 - Fallacy of Composition
59 - Hasty Generalization
36 - Genetic Fallacy
31 - Burden of Proof
29 - Biased Generalization
27 - Confusing Cause and Effect
27 - Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief
24 - Appeal to Belief
23 - Relativist Fallacy
22 - Post Hoc
20 - Misleading Vividness
19 - Guilt by Association
18 - Begging the Question
16 - Red Herring
15 - Ad Hominem
12 - False Dilemma
11 - Ignoring a Common Cause
11 - Circumstantial Ad Hominem
11 - Slippery Slope
10 - Appeal to Common Practice
8 - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
7 - Appeal to Novelty
4 - Special Pleading
4 - Poisoning the Well
4 - Personal Attack
4 - Appeal to Spite
3 - Gambler's Fallacy
3 - Appeal to Ridicule
2 - Appeal to Popularity
2 - Middle Ground
2 - Appeal to Pity
2 - Appeal to Authority
2 - Appeal to Tradition
2 - Appeal to Emotion
2 - Peer Pressure
1 - Appeal to Fear
1 - Appeal to Flattery

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. David Cameron image owned by Guillaume Paumier.