Bene Viera’s “An Open Letter to Tyler Perry” was a response to Tyler Perry’s different works as an artist but his personal response, his latest letter to his fans “Kim Kardashian in Marriage Counselor” Her evidently strong beliefs that Tyler Perry only portrays the women in his films in certain ways is the divine influence beneath her motives in writing this letter, which allow her to present her refutes. In this letter, Viera commits numerous divergent fallacies in which they ineffectively benefit her assertions towards Tyler Perry. While appealing to the readers emotions, ethics and logics, Viera erroneously weakens her argument throughout her open letter . In response to Tyler Perry’s numerous films, Ms. Viera attempts to appeal
…show more content…
You certainly have the right to cast whomever you think can play the part. I also understand this to be a great business move. You and I know that Kim Kardashian’s role, no matter how big or small, will ultimately get her fans in the theater seats, which equals more money in your bank account.
By implying Tyler Perry main reason to have casted Kim Kardashian to be in his film because it would make him more money is great example of her casual use of a faulty fallacy. She’s giving the reader this false sense of Tyler Perry’s choices. Her choice in deciding to mention this give this bogus idea that the action taken to cast Kim Kardashian was the cause of a second event, his large box office revenue. Although, some actions do produce reactions, it’s a tough call to blame the casting of an individual as the essential basis of his revenue. This supposed connection between the cause and effect is completely erroneous and it’s disadvantageous in her attempts to effectively persuade the audience of her argument. In addition to committing this type of logical fallacy, Viera effectively executes a type of emotional
You certainly have the right to cast whomever you think can play the part. I also understand this to be a great business move. You and I know that Kim Kardashian’s role, no matter how big or small, will ultimately get her fans in the theater seats, which equals more money in your bank account.
By implying Tyler Perry main reason to have casted Kim Kardashian to be in his film because it would make him more money is great example of her casual use of a faulty fallacy. She’s giving the reader this false sense of Tyler Perry’s choices. Her choice in deciding to mention this give this bogus idea that the action taken to cast Kim Kardashian was the cause of a second event, his large box office revenue. Although, some actions do produce reactions, it’s a tough call to blame the casting of an individual as the essential basis of his revenue. This supposed connection between the cause and effect is completely erroneous and it’s disadvantageous in her attempts to effectively persuade the audience of her argument. In addition to committing this type of logical fallacy, Viera effectively executes a type of emotional