Recognize a faulty reasoning pattern

Supplied materials

• Paper and pencil, or a browser text area. All named people/events/records are fictional learning inputs.
• Worked case: Excerpt A: Three of four trial visitors asked for part names. Labels can connect those names to the diagram, so test clearer labels. Excerpt B: Ignore Lea’s label proposal; her coat is ridiculous. Excerpt C: The log lists four returned forms. Excerpt D: Record A covers one month; B covers one year, both counting the same defined visitors.
• Primary check: Excerpt A: Trust my label proposal: I trained as a display designer for five years. No outcome data are supplied here. Excerpt B: We must choose red or blue labels. The supplied catalog also offers readable black labels. Excerpt C: Jo said nothing when the card arrived. The writer claims she intended to impress the visitors. Excerpt D: A counts all visitors; B counts only registered members, both during May.

Learn the idea

A personal attack targets someone instead of the claim; false either/or excludes stated alternatives; a hasty generalization expands an inadequate sample. Some supplied arguments show no such error.

Compare the reasoning with the stated evidence and alternatives. Name only the error that is demonstrated.

Original worked input: Original excerpt B: Ignore Lea’s label proposal; her coat is ridiculous. The task is to recognize a faulty reasoning pattern. The answer is “personal attack”. Evidence: Ignore Lea’s label proposal; her coat is ridiculous. Reasoning: personal attack is supported because clothing or personal traits replace a response to the proposal. Disagreement itself is not a fallacy.

1. Read the supplied worked case and identify the part named in this lesson. An adult can model unfamiliar words.
2. Compare the reasoning with the stated evidence and alternatives. Name only the error that is demonstrated.
3. Check the worked solution: personal attack. Evidence: Ignore Lea’s label proposal; her coat is ridiculous. Reasoning: personal attack is supported because clothing or personal traits replace a response to the proposal. Disagreement itself is not a fallacy.
4. Use the new primary and practice cases. Give a reason from the actual words before checking the feedback.

Check your reasoning

Your answer is temporary and is not saved to an account. Download your current answer before leaving or reloading. Written work on paper or in another app stays in your own file.

Take it further

Changed-input task: Original excerpt B: The writer reviews every supplied result and limits the proposal to a further trial without attacking anyone. Give an evidence-based answer before looking at the model. Expected reasoning: Evidence: The writer reviews every supplied result and limits the proposal to a further trial without attacking anyone. Reasoning: no specified reasoning error is supported because the conclusion considers the supplied evidence with the stated limits and shows none of these named defects. Disagreement itself is not a fallacy. Then write a brief alternative sentence, paragraph, source note or scene that demonstrates the same operation; label new fictional details and preserve source limits.

Nothing here is saved to an account or sent to a teacher. The answer download includes your current choice and any checked feedback. It does not include choices from the separate More practice section. Download that section separately.