{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Exercise 7 6 1 assuming that the sheriffs department

Info iconThis preview shows pages 7–10. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Exercise 7-6 ▲1. Assuming that the sheriff’s department has more than two officers, the speaker is misrepresenting her opponent’s position. Straw man. 2. Inconsistency ad hominem 3. Straw man ▲4. Misplaced burden of proof 5. Straw man 6. Inconsistency ad hominem ▲7. Perfectionist fallacy (version of false dilemma) 8. Begging the question (in the last sentence) 9. Perfectionist fallacy (version of false dilemma) ▲10. Slippery slope, with a large dose of outrage Exercise 7-7 ▲1. Ad hominem: inconsistency. You hear this kind of thing a lot. 2. Begging the question 3. Misplaced burden of proof in Moe’s second remark. He’s sneaking up on another one in his last remark. ▲4. Ad hominem: personal attack 5. Slippery slope, and, as is frequently the case, a strong hint of straw man 6. False dilemma. Clearly, there are other things going on in this passage, too. ▲7. False dilemma (in the last sentence) supported by a slippery slope earlier. 8. Circumstantial ad hominem 9. Burden of proof (third sentence) ▲10. Ad hominem: personal attack; Don Regan’s motives are irrelevant to whether what he reported is true. Exercise 7-8 Clyde’s remark about living in a shack is a straw man and part of a false dilemma: they aren’t limited to living in a shack or buying this expensive house. Maude presents a circumstantial ad hominem in her next remark, followed by Clyde with an inconsistency ad hominem in his IM – 6&7 | 7
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
“upscale” remark. We don’t think Maude’s claim about not being able to heat it is real hyperbole, but we wouldn’t argue about it either. Clyde puts up a line-drawing fallacy with his escalating monthly payment remarks, then begs the question with his “it’s within our means” claim. That the couple is “bound to make money on it” is close to a proof surrogate: who says they’re bound to make money on it? This is followed by Clyde’s misplaced burden of proof and Maude’s slippery slope. Exercise 7-9 ▲1. d 2. d 3. c ▲4. b 5. a (Notice that the question is begged by means of a loaded question—a common technique.) 6. e ▲7. a 8. e 9. d ▲10. A (This is a case of perfectionist fallacy, but students should realize that every case of perfectionist fallacy is a case of red herring (as well as fasle dilemma). Red herring is a very broad category. Exercise 7-10 ▲1. c 2. b 3. d ▲4. c, to the extent this is anything beyond a complaint 5. b 6. e ▲7. b 8. a 9. a ▲10. C Exercise 7-11 ▲1. b 2. e 3. b IM – 6&7 | 8
Background image of page 8
▲4. d, and a proof surrogate as well 5. b 6. b ▲7. e 8. e; we’d call it a red herring if it were on the list 9. e (peer pressure) ▲10. a 11. a 12. a Exercise 7-12 ▲1. Straw man, smokescreen/red herring 2. Scare tactics 3. Red herring or argument from pity with regard to the company’s product. Compare with the next exercise. ▲4. No fallacy. Notice that the passage is designed to attack the company, not the company’s product. The wages it pays are relevant to the point at issue.
Background image of page 9

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 10
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}