Classic Flaws Set 1

When the author reads the conditional supplied in the premise incorrectly . 
- the author read the conditional chain backwards without negating
- the author negated the premise chain and read straight through

- the author read the conditional chain backwards without negating
- the author negated the premise chain and read straight through

when the author see that two things are correlated and concludes that one of those things is causing the other

1. When the author says a member of a category has a property.
2. when the author concludes that the category itself also has that property

1. When an author says a category has a property
2. When an author concluded that a member of that category also has that property

1. When the author talks about something having a property
2. When the author concluded that a bunch of other things also have that property.

When you have something small in the stimulus (hot temperature) and turn it into something big (temperatures in general).
- To _____ you take a premise about hot temperatures and collude about temperatures in general

1. When there is a survey
2. The author concludes things based on the survery
3. There are all kinds of silent things wrong with the survey (biased sample/question, small sample size, survey lairs, other contradictory surveys )

Research always assumes that the two groups are same in all respects except the ones called out as part of the study

1. There's a study with two people
2. Crazy researchers assumes the two groups are the same in all respects except those pointed out as part of the study
3. Crazy researchers concludes that the difference in the study results are due to the one key difference the study is focusing on

Tells people what they believe

1. Person has a belief
2. Author mentions a factual implication of that belief
3. Author claims that the person believes the implication of the belief

Pretends there are only tow options when there could be more  .
1. Limiting a spectrum
2. Limiting options

1. Crazy person outlines two possible options (this step is absent when limiting a spectrum)
2. Crazy person eliminates one of the options
3. Crazy person concludes the second option must be the case