Identify any examples of fallacies in the following passages. Tell why you
think these are fallacies, and identify which category they belong in, if they fit any category we’ve described. Am I correct
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
Inconsistency ad hominin fallacy
3. In one of her columns, Abigail Van Buren printed the letter of “I’d rather
be a widow.” The letter writer, a divorcée, complained about widows
who said they had a hard time coping. Far better, she wrote, to be a
widow than to be a divorcée, who are all “rejects” who have been “publicly
dumped” and are avoided “like they have leprosy.” Abby recognized
the pseudoreasoning for what it was, though she did not call it by our
name. What is our name for it?
Answer Personal attack
Straw Man
The passage in question contains a fallacy known as inconsistency ad hominem, which involves attacking someone's character or personal beliefs instead of addressing the argument they are making. In this case, the letter writer accuses Andrea Keene of having "selective morality" and questions whether anti-abortionists should also be against the use of fertility drugs. The letter suggests that if the pro-lifers truly believe in the sanctity of life, they should also denounce fertility drugs, as they can result in the death of one of the infants. However, instead of addressing the argument against abortion directly, the letter attacks the writer's character and accuses them of inconsistency.
As for the second passage, it exhibits a fallacy called a personal attack, where someone attacks the character or personal qualities of an individual instead of addressing their argument. In this case, the letter writer criticizes divorcées by referring to them as "rejects" who have been "publicly dumped" and are avoided "like they have leprosy," implying that they should not complain about their hardships because being a widow is worse. This personal attack diverts attention from the actual issue being discussed and undermines the letter writer's argument.
It's important to recognize these fallacies in order to maintain logical and rational discussions that focus on the merits of the arguments presented rather than attacking the individuals making them.