POWER OF LOGIC 6TH EDITION
HOWARD-SNYDER SOLUTIONS TEST
PAPER 2026 EXAM REVIEW WITH
COMPLETE SOLVED SOLUTIONS
⩥ Informal Fallacy. Answer: Errors in reasoning that do not involve the
explicit use of an invalid form. 1) Fallacies of irrelevance 2) Fallacies
involving ambiguity 3) Fallacies involving unwarranted assumptions
⩥ Ad Hominem - Argument Against the Person (Fallacy of Irrelevance).
Answer: The argument against the person (or ad hominem fallacy)
involves attacking the person who advances the argument. Three forms:
Abusive ad hominem, Circumstantial ad hominem, Tu quoque
⩥ Abusive ad hominem. Answer: Direct personal attack on the
opponent.
⩥ Circumstantial ad hominem. Answer: Attempts to discredit by calling
attention to the circumstances or situation of the opponent.
⩥ Tu quoque. Answer: Charges the opponent with hypocrisy or
inconsistency.
,⩥ Strawman. Answer: Premises: A misrepresentation of the view is
false.
Conclusion: The view itself is false.
⩥ Appeal to Force (Ad Baculum Fallacy). Answer: Premises: You can
avoid harm by accepting this statement. Conclusion: This statement is
true.
⩥ Appeal to People (Ad Populum Fallacy). Answer: Premises: You will
be accepted or valued if you believe this statement. Conclusion: This
statement is true.
⩥ Appeal to Pity (Ad Misericordian Fallacy). Answer: Premises: You
have reason to pity this person (or group). Conclusion: You should do X
for the benefit of this person (or group), although doing X is not called
for logically by the reason given.
⩥ Appeal to ignorance. Answer: Premises: This statement has not been
proven true. Conclusion: This statement is false (or may be reasonably
believed false).
OR
, Premises: This statement has not been proven false. Conclusion: This
statement is true (or may be reasonably believed true).
⩥ Red Herring (AKA Missing the point or Ignoration Elenchi). Answer:
Premises: Something relevant to the topic at hand is described.
Conclusion: A distracting but often unnoticed change of subject
occurred.
⩥ Fallacies Involving Ambiguity. Answer: Arguments that contain
ambiguous words (phrases or statements)
Equivocation, Amphiboly, Composition,Division
⩥ Equivocation. Answer: Premises: Contain a key word (or phrase) that
is ambiguous. Conclusion: Is reached not by valid logical inference but
by trading on the ambiguity of the key word (or phrase).
⩥ Amphiboly. Answer: Premises: Contain a sentence that is ambiguous
due to faulty structure (eg grammar or punctuation). Conclusion: Is
reached not by valid logical inference but by trading on the structural
ambiguity.
⩥ Composition. Answer: Premises: The parts (or members) have
attribute X
Conclusion: The whole (or group) has attribute X
HOWARD-SNYDER SOLUTIONS TEST
PAPER 2026 EXAM REVIEW WITH
COMPLETE SOLVED SOLUTIONS
⩥ Informal Fallacy. Answer: Errors in reasoning that do not involve the
explicit use of an invalid form. 1) Fallacies of irrelevance 2) Fallacies
involving ambiguity 3) Fallacies involving unwarranted assumptions
⩥ Ad Hominem - Argument Against the Person (Fallacy of Irrelevance).
Answer: The argument against the person (or ad hominem fallacy)
involves attacking the person who advances the argument. Three forms:
Abusive ad hominem, Circumstantial ad hominem, Tu quoque
⩥ Abusive ad hominem. Answer: Direct personal attack on the
opponent.
⩥ Circumstantial ad hominem. Answer: Attempts to discredit by calling
attention to the circumstances or situation of the opponent.
⩥ Tu quoque. Answer: Charges the opponent with hypocrisy or
inconsistency.
,⩥ Strawman. Answer: Premises: A misrepresentation of the view is
false.
Conclusion: The view itself is false.
⩥ Appeal to Force (Ad Baculum Fallacy). Answer: Premises: You can
avoid harm by accepting this statement. Conclusion: This statement is
true.
⩥ Appeal to People (Ad Populum Fallacy). Answer: Premises: You will
be accepted or valued if you believe this statement. Conclusion: This
statement is true.
⩥ Appeal to Pity (Ad Misericordian Fallacy). Answer: Premises: You
have reason to pity this person (or group). Conclusion: You should do X
for the benefit of this person (or group), although doing X is not called
for logically by the reason given.
⩥ Appeal to ignorance. Answer: Premises: This statement has not been
proven true. Conclusion: This statement is false (or may be reasonably
believed false).
OR
, Premises: This statement has not been proven false. Conclusion: This
statement is true (or may be reasonably believed true).
⩥ Red Herring (AKA Missing the point or Ignoration Elenchi). Answer:
Premises: Something relevant to the topic at hand is described.
Conclusion: A distracting but often unnoticed change of subject
occurred.
⩥ Fallacies Involving Ambiguity. Answer: Arguments that contain
ambiguous words (phrases or statements)
Equivocation, Amphiboly, Composition,Division
⩥ Equivocation. Answer: Premises: Contain a key word (or phrase) that
is ambiguous. Conclusion: Is reached not by valid logical inference but
by trading on the ambiguity of the key word (or phrase).
⩥ Amphiboly. Answer: Premises: Contain a sentence that is ambiguous
due to faulty structure (eg grammar or punctuation). Conclusion: Is
reached not by valid logical inference but by trading on the structural
ambiguity.
⩥ Composition. Answer: Premises: The parts (or members) have
attribute X
Conclusion: The whole (or group) has attribute X
