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 #o75 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.
"Bill lives in a large building, so his apartment must be large."
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

 1,257 Total Answer Attempts   44%
 548 Correctly Popped Fallacies
 709 Incorrectly Un/Popped
( Random Image )

Most Common Responses

 
548 - Fallacy of Division
101 - Hasty Generalization
62 - Biased Generalization
58 - Fallacy of Composition
47 - Relativist Fallacy
33 - Misleading Vividness
31 - Confusing Cause and Effect
27 - Genetic Fallacy
26 - Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief
25 - Burden of Proof
24 - Post Hoc
23 - Appeal to Belief
22 - Circumstantial Ad Hominem
21 - Guilt by Association
19 - Appeal to Common Practice
19 - Gambler's Fallacy
18 - Slippery Slope
15 - Red Herring
15 - Ad Hominem
15 - Ignoring a Common Cause
13 - False Dilemma
12 - Begging the Question
11 - Appeal to Ridicule
9 - Appeal to Flattery
7 - Appeal to Spite
6 - Appeal to Tradition
6 - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
6 - Middle Ground
6 - Poisoning the Well
6 - Appeal to Popularity
5 - Appeal to Novelty
4 - Special Pleading
4 - Personal Attack
3 - Appeal to Authority
3 - Appeal to Pity
3 - Appeal to Emotion
2 - Appeal to Fear
2 - Peer Pressure

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.