Argument Types — Logic & Fallacy Quiz

How to Play Argument Types

1. 1

   Read the Argument

   Each question presents an argument — it may be a formal multi-premise syllogism (like 'All mammals breathe air. Dolphins are mammals. ∴ Dolphins breathe air.') or an informal everyday argument (like 'You can't trust Maria's opinion — she's overweight.'). The '∴' symbol means 'therefore' and marks the conclusion.

2. 2

   Check the Category Badge

   The colored badge tells you what you're being asked: IDENTIFY TYPE means pick which kind of reasoning this is. FALLACY means name the specific logical error. FORMAL LOGIC means classify the argument structure using formal logic terms. EVALUATE means assess whether the argument is valid, sound, or strong.

3. 3

   Choose Your Level

   Foundation covers the classic fallacies taught in critical thinking and rhetoric courses. Intermediate adds subtler informal fallacies that require more nuance to recognize — like post hoc vs. false cause, or tu quoque vs. ad hominem. Advanced introduces formal logic notation, the validity/soundness distinction, and the difference between formal and informal fallacies.

4. 4

   Learn from the Explanation

   After every answer, a detailed explanation appears showing exactly why the correct answer is right — including why the other options are wrong. For fallacies, the explanation names the Latin term, gives the structure of the error, and provides the key insight for recognizing it in the future.

Key Features

• 45 Problems Across 3 Tiers

  Foundation (15): Distinguish deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning from clear examples; identify the most widely taught fallacies — ad hominem, straw man, false dilemma, slippery slope, bandwagon, appeal to tradition, hasty generalization, and appeal to ignorance. Intermediate (15): Name subtler informal fallacies — anecdotal evidence, tu quoque, false cause (cum hoc), post hoc ergo propter hoc, appeal to nature, poisoning the well, circular reasoning, circumstantial ad hominem, relative privation, and appeal to consequences. Advanced (15): Formal fallacies with logical notation (affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, modus tollens), validity vs. soundness distinctions, equivocation, non sequitur, red herring, and abductive inference-to-best-explanation.

• Formal Argument Display

  Multi-premise arguments are shown in structured form with premises listed above a dividing line and the conclusion introduced with '∴' (therefore) in gold. This mirrors how arguments are presented in logic textbooks and philosophy courses, making the structure immediately readable.

• 4 Question Modes

  IDENTIFY TYPE (amber): What kind of reasoning is this — deductive, inductive, abductive, or analogical? FALLACY (rose): What is the name of the fallacy in this argument? FORMAL LOGIC (purple): Classify the argument form — is it modus ponens, modus tollens, affirming the consequent, or denying the antecedent? EVALUATE (sky): Is this argument valid, sound, strong, or weak?

• Dark Indigo Philosophical Theme

  The game uses a deep slate/indigo color scheme with gold accents — evoking the atmosphere of a philosophy seminar or logic classroom. The lobby displays the classic Socrates syllogism alongside a visual summary of the three argument types, immediately orienting new players.

Frequently Asked Questions