WHAT TYPE OF FACELLIES IS THIS QUESTION AND WHY:

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 the

spread of the disease. “If you could prove that condoms were absolutely

dependable in preventing a person from contracting AIDS, then the

Church could support their use.”

In February 1992, a representative of the Catholic Church in Puerto Rico

Did some of this get cut off? Fallacies is what you intended to type above, correct?

I don't know what type of fallacy it is, but any type of treatment or vaccine is not 100% effective. They are ignoring the relatively high proportion of success of condoms in preventing AIDS. In essence, the Church saying that, if one condom fails, this is the reason for not using condoms.

I hope this helps.

go to aceyourclassesdotcom for crt 205 assignments

This question is asking about the type of fallacy present in the statement made by the representative of the Catholic Church in Puerto Rico. To determine the type of fallacy, we need to analyze the reasoning behind their argument.

The representative states that the Church cannot support the use of condoms because they are not absolutely reliable in preventing the spread of AIDS. They go on to say that if condoms were proven to be absolutely dependable in preventing the contraction of AIDS, then the Church could support their use.

The fallacy present in this argument is a form of the "Appeal to Ignorance" fallacy, specifically an example of "shifting the burden of proof." The representative is making a claim that condoms are not absolutely reliable without providing any evidence to support this claim. Instead, they shift the burden of proof onto those who advocate for the use of condoms, demanding proof of absolute reliability before they can support it.

To answer the question, you would explain that the type of fallacy present in this argument is the "Appeal to Ignorance" fallacy, specifically "shifting the burden of proof."