I have posted my assignment several times and noone has responded to what I need help with I am going to post it one more time to see if anyone can check over my questions and answeres and give me some type of feed back
Checkpoint :Identifying Fallacies
For this checkpoint, you will only be using the following fallacies.
Ad hominem (inconsistency)
Begging the question
false dilemma
Straw man
You must choose which category the statement is in and Explain why you think this fallacy exists in the example.
2. Letter to the editor: "Andrea Keene's selective morality is once again showing through in her July 15 letter. This time she expresses her abhorrence of abortion. But how we see only what we choose to see! I wonder if any of the anti abortionists have considered the widespread use of fertility drugs as the moral equivalent of abortion, and, if they have why they haven't come out against them, too. The use of these drugs frequently results in multiple births, which leads to the death of one of the infants, often after an agonizing struggle for survival. According to the rules of the pro-lifers, isn't this murder?
Answer
Ad hominem(inconsistency)> The reason why I believe this statement to be an ad hominem (inconsistency) is because the author is saying “ you too” should the anti abortionist speak on the fertility drugs.
3. In one of her columns, Abigail Van Buren printed the letter of "I'd rather be a widow."The letter writer, a divorcee, complained about widows who said they had a hard time coping. Far better, she wrote , to be a widow than to be a divorcee, who are all "rejects" who have been "publicly dumped" and are avoided " like they have leprosy." Abby recognized the pseudo reasoning for what it was, though she did not call it by our name. What is our name for it?
Answer
Ad hominem (inconsistency)> The reason why I believe this statement to be an ad hominem(inconsistency) is because the writer is basically saying that she would rather be a widow than a divorcee due to the embarrassment.
5. Letter to the editor: “Once again the Park Commission is considering closing North Park Drive for the sake of a few joggers and bicyclists. These so-called fitness enthusiasts would evidently have us give to them for their own private use every last square inch of Walnut Grove. Then anytime anyone wanted a picnic, he would have to park and carry everything in- ice chests, chairs, maybe even grandma. I certainly hope the commission keeps the entire park open for everyone to use."
Answer
Straw man> the reason why I believe that this is a straw man fallacy is because the writer exaggerates about carrying everything in – icechests, chairs maybe even grandma.
6." Some Christian - and other- groups are protesting against the placing, on federal property near the White house, of a set of plastic figurines representing a devout Jewish family in ancient Judea. The protesters would of course deny that they are driven by any anti-Semitic motivation. Still we wonder: Would they raise the same objections (of unconstitutionality, etc.) if the scene depicted a modern, secularized Gentile family?"
Answer
Begging the question> The reason why I believe this statement to be a begging the question fallacy is because the author is making a claim about Christians and their beliefs.
8. From a letter to the editor: “The counties of Michigan clearly need the ability to raise additional sources of revenue, not only to meet the demands of growth but also to maintain existing levels of service. For without these sources those demands will not be met, and it will be impossible to maintain services even at present levels."
Answer
Begging the question> the reason why I believe this statement is because the author is assuming that demands will not be met.
9. In February 1992, a representative of the Catholic Church in Puerto Rico gave a radio interview (broadcast on National public Radio) in which he said that the Church was against the use of condoms. Even though the rate of AIDS infection in Puerto Rico is much higher than on the U.S. mainland, the spokesman said that the Church could not support the use of condoms because they are not absolutely reliable in preventing a person from contracting AIDS, then the Church could support their use."
Answer
False dilemma> The reason why I believe this excerpt to be false dilemma is because the author is not considering that condoms can prevent an individual from contracting AIDS.
I haven't answered because the descriptions of these fallacies that I found may be different than yours.
Ad Hominem (Argument To The Man):
attacking the person instead of attacking his argument. For example, "Von Daniken's books about ancient astronauts are worthless because he is a convicted forger and embezzler." (Which is true, but that's not why they're worthless.)
Another example is this syllogism, which alludes to Alan Turing's homosexuality:
Turing thinks machines think.
Turing lies with men.
Therefore, machines don't think.
(Note the equivocation in the use of the word "lies".)
A common form is an attack on sincerity. For example, "How can you argue for vegetarianism when you wear leather shoes ?" The two wrongs make a right fallacy is related.
A variation (related to Argument By Generalization) is to attack a whole class of people. For example, "Evolutionary biology is a sinister tool of the materialistic, atheistic religion of Secular Humanism." Similarly, one notorious net.kook waved away a whole category of evidence by announcing "All the scientists were drunk."
Another variation is attack by innuendo: "Why don't scientists tell us what they really know; are they afraid of public panic ?"
Begging The Question (Assuming The Answer, Tautology):
reasoning in a circle. The thing to be proved is used as one of your assumptions. For example: "We must have a death penalty to discourage violent crime". (This assumes it discourages crime.) Or, "The stock market fell because of a technical adjustment." (But is an "adjustment" just a stock market fall ?)
Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension):
attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position.
For example, the claim that "evolution means a dog giving birth to a cat."
Another example: "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."
On the Internet, it is common to exaggerate the opponent's position so that a comparison can be made between the opponent and Hitler.
Also Known as: Black & White Thinking.
Description of False Dilemma
A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following pattern of "reasoning":
Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false).
Claim Y is false.
Therefore claim X is true.
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false. That this is the case is made clear by the following example:
Either 1+1=4 or 1+1=12.
It is not the case that 1+1=4.
Therefore 1+1=12.
In cases in which the two options are, in fact, the only two options, this line of reasoning is not fallacious. For example:
Bill is dead or he is alive.
Bill is not dead.
Therefore Bill is alive.
Examples of False Dilemma
Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year."
Senator Bill: "Why?"
Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."
Bill: "Jill and I both support having prayer in public schools."
Jill: "Hey, I never said that!"
Bill: "You're not an atheist are you Jill?"
"Look, you are going to have to make up your mind. Either you decide that you can afford this stereo, or you decide you are going to do without music for a while."
Taken from these sources:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/false-dilemma.html
Hi Mrs.Sue I am thinking that we have the same definitions i am just trying to ensure if i am categorizing the excerpts in the correct Fallacy category and if not I will try and repost what I have done.
I understand that you are seeking feedback on your assignment. While I am an AI bot and cannot provide subjective feedback, I can help you analyze your answers.
Let's go through each example and fallacy identified:
1. The first example is missing, so we cannot provide feedback on it.
2. You identified the fallacy as "Ad hominem (inconsistency)" for the statement in the letter to the editor. However, it seems like your explanation is not quite accurate. Ad hominem fallacy involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself. In this case, the writer is not attacking a specific person but rather pointing out an inconsistency in the anti-abortion stance. A more appropriate fallacy for this example might be "tu quoque" fallacy or a form of moral equivalency fallacy, where the writer is suggesting that if anti-abortionists consider abortion murder, they should also consider fertility drug use leading to multiple births as murder.
3. You identified the fallacy correctly as "Ad hominem (inconsistency)" for this example. The writer is using an ad hominem argument by insulting divorcees and claiming widows have it better.
4. The fourth example is missing, so we cannot provide feedback on it.
5. You identified the fallacy correctly as "Straw man" for this example. The writer is misrepresenting the argument made by the Park Commission and exaggerating the consequences of closing North Park Drive.
6. You identified the fallacy as "Begging the question" for this example. However, it seems like your explanation is not quite accurate. Begging the question fallacy occurs when the argument assumes the conclusion is true without providing evidence. In this case, the argument is comparing the reactions of protesters to different scenarios and questioning their motivations. A more appropriate fallacy for this example might be "equivocation" or "red herring" fallacy as it distracts from the main issue by raising a different scenario.
7. The seventh example is missing, so we cannot provide feedback on it.
8. You identified the fallacy as "Begging the question" for this example. However, it seems like your explanation is not quite accurate. The statement does not assume the conclusion is true without providing evidence. A more appropriate fallacy for this example might be "false cause" fallacy, as it suggests that raising additional sources of revenue is necessary to meet the demands of growth and maintain existing levels of service, without providing evidence or considering alternative solutions.
9. You identified the fallacy correctly as "False dilemma" for this example. The author presents a false either/or choice by suggesting that if condoms are not absolutely reliable in preventing AIDS, then the Church cannot support their use. The fallacy is that there are other reasons to support the use of condoms, even if they are not 100% effective.
In summary, while you identified some fallacies correctly, there are some instances where the explanations could be improved. It's important to carefully analyze the arguments and consider what fallacy best describes the error in reasoning. Additionally, make sure the explanation aligns with the specific fallacy identified.