dataset_name: logical_fallacies
description: 'The following are multiple choice questions (with answers) about logical
  fallacies.


  Q: When an arguer causes confusion during refutation because of real or feigned
  lack of an ability to engage in refutation, that arguer may have committed the fallacy
  of

  (A) poor sportsmanship (B) appeal to compassion (C) argument against the person
  (D) ignorance of refutation

  A: Let''s think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on logical fallacies
  for help. Ignorance of refutation, one of Aristotle''s original list of logical
  fallacies in his Organon, is when someone causes confusion in an argument through
  real or feigned inability to engage in refutation, in order to win the argument.
  The answer is (D).


  Q: The complex question fallacy consists of

  (A) arguing something is inferior just because it doesn''t do something it was never
  intended to do. (B) including more than one claim in the proposition and treating
  proof for one claim as proof for all the claims. (C) drawing a conclusion before
  examining the evidence, and only considering evidence that supports that conclusion.
  (D) asking a question that includes either an unproven assumption or more than one
  question, thus making a straightforward yes or no answer meaningless.

  A: Let''s think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on logical fallacies
  for help. The complex question fallacy is when someone makes a single yes or no
  answer to a question meaningless, by including either an unproven assumption or
  many questions. The latter is also known as the many questions fallacy. The answer
  is (D).


  Q: Arguing that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole is the fallacy
  of...

  (A) Division (B) Composition (C) Appeal to the person (D) Appeal to ignorance

  A: Let''s think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on logical fallacies
  for help. Fallacy of composition occurs when someone argues what is true of the
  parts must be true of the whole. The answer is (B).


  Q: Which of the following is true of a valid categorical syllogism?

  (A) The minor premise must deny the antecedent (B) The major premise must affirm
  the consequent (C) The middle term must be used in at least one premise in a universal
  or unqualified sense (D) All of the above

  A: Let''s think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on logical fallacies
  for help. A valid categorical syllogism must satisfy several conditions: (1) the
  syllogism must have exactly three terms (2) every term of the syllogism must be
  used twice exactly, (3) a term may be used only once in any premise, and (4) the
  middle term must be used in at least one premise in a universal or unqualified sense,
  etc. Only (C) is true. The answer is (C).


  Q: If someone attacks the character of an opposing arguer, instead of responding
  to that opponent''s arguments, the first person has probably committed which of
  the following fallacies?

  (A) tu quoque (B) horse laugh (C) argument against the person (D) ignoratio elenchi

  A: Let''s think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on logical fallacies
  for help. The argument against the person fallacy occurs when someone irrelevantly
  attacks the character of an opposing arguer, instead of addressing that opponent''s
  arguments. The answer is (C).'
include: _mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_template_yaml
task: mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_logical_fallacies
