Common Weak Arguments

The UCAT Decision Making subtest regularly includes weak arguments as distractor options in "strongest argument" questions. Recognising common weak argument types allows you to eliminate incorrect options quickly and focus on genuinely strong arguments. This lesson catalogues the most frequent types of weak arguments you will encounter.

---

Type 1: Emotional Appeals (Argumentum ad Passiones)

An emotional appeal tries to persuade through feelings rather than evidence.

Example: "Hospitals should provide single rooms for all patients because sharing a room is distressing."

Why it is weak: "Distressing" is a subjective emotional response. The argument does not provide evidence about health outcomes, recovery rates, or any measurable benefit of single rooms. A stronger version would cite evidence: "Single rooms reduce hospital-acquired infections by 20%."

How to Spot It

Look for emotive language: "unfair," "cruel," "distressing," "heartbreaking," "deserves," "outrageous." These signal an appeal to emotion rather than evidence.

---

Type 2: Ad Hominem Arguments

An ad hominem argument attacks the person making a claim rather than the claim itself.

Example: "The proposed NHS reform should be rejected because the minister proposing it has no medical background."