Level 4 — Upper Intermediate · Argument Writing
Task 33: Writing an Argument That Avoids a Named Fallacy
Write a short argument that deliberately avoids a specific logical fallacy, and explain exactly how it does so — the writing side of Lesson 33's argument evaluation and fallacy skills.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this task, you should be able to:
- Write a short argument that deliberately avoids one specific, named logical fallacy
- Explain in writing exactly how the argument avoids that fallacy, not just assert that it does
- Use 'not established' rather than 'wrong' when a claim is merely unproven, not disproven
Introduction
Lesson 33 gave you eighteen named logical fallacies and a framework for judging whether an argument's evidence is relevant, sufficient, and reliable. This task asks you to write with that discipline: build a short argument that deliberately steers around one named fallacy, and then prove, in your own explanation, that you actually avoided it.
The Rule, for Writing
Core Concept
Pick one fallacy from Lesson 33 (hasty generalization, post hoc reasoning, false dilemma, straw man, and so on) that your topic makes it tempting to commit. Write your argument so it avoids that exact trap — for example, qualify a generalization with a sample size instead of generalizing from one case, or acknowledge the sequence isn't proof of cause instead of committing post hoc reasoning. Then add one sentence naming the fallacy you avoided and explaining, specifically, how your wording avoided it. Use "not established" for a claim that's simply unproven, reserving "wrong" for a claim actually contradicted by evidence.
Example
Tempting, fallacious version: "My last shipment was delayed by the new customs software, so the software clearly causes delays." Version that avoids post hoc reasoning: "My last shipment was delayed after the new customs software was introduced, but one case isn't established proof — the delay could also be explained by the holiday backlog that same week." Explanation: this avoids post hoc reasoning by explicitly naming an alternative explanation instead of treating sequence as proof.
Your Turn
Your Turn
Choose one fallacy from Lesson 33 that your topic makes tempting (hasty generalization, post hoc reasoning, false dilemma, or another you remember). Write a short argument on a real or plausible topic that deliberately avoids committing it — use "not established" rather than "wrong" for anything merely unproven. Then add a final sentence naming the fallacy and explaining specifically how your wording avoided it.
Vocabulary in Context
hasty generalizationnoun phrasetechnical
drawing a broad conclusion from too small or narrow a sample (তড়িঘড়ি সাধারণীকরণ)
Often with commit a hasty generalization, avoid a hasty generalization, example of hasty generalization
“Judging a supplier from a single late delivery is a hasty generalization.”
post hoc reasoningnoun phrasetechnical
assuming that because one event followed another, the first must have caused the second (পরবর্তী-অতএব-কারণ যুক্তি)
Often with avoid post hoc reasoning, fall into post hoc reasoning, example of post hoc reasoning
“Crediting the new policy because accidents fell afterwards is post hoc reasoning.”
Model Answer
Show a model answer
Two of the five warehouse staff who switched to the new inventory scanner reported fewer counting errors this month. This is not established proof that the scanner reduces errors across the whole warehouse, since a sample of two employees over one month is far too small, and both happened to be the most experienced staff on the floor. A larger trial across more staff and more months would be needed before drawing that conclusion. This avoids hasty generalization by keeping the claim's scope tied honestly to its small sample, instead of extending it to the whole team.
Self-Check
Self-Check
- Did you pick one specific named fallacy and write around it deliberately, not just generally hedge?
- Does your explanation sentence show exactly how your wording avoided that fallacy, not just claim it did?
- Did you use "not established" for an unproven claim, rather than the stronger "wrong"?
- Did you write this directly in English, without translating from Bangla first?
Next: Writing 34 — Rhetorical Structure & Author Purpose: writing a short passage in a specific rhetorical structure, then naming the purpose your own word choices were built to serve.