Fallacies
Name
Institutional Affiliation A fallacy is an argument that uses poor reasoning. In other words, a fallacy is a mistake in belief which is based on unsound reasoning and arguments (Van, 2011). This paper will be analyzing a certain speech by George W Bush to identify the various fallacies in the entire speech. It is a fallacy to term the American people as the God chosen people (Van, 2011). Bush in his speech terms his people as the God chosen people. It is very clear that, at this time there was a lot of violence in Iraq. It is a fallacy for Bush to say that Iraq is far much stable. It is a fallacy because; at the same time Bush is ending troops to Iraq. How can one send troops to a nation where there is stability in all aspects? (Van, 2011).
Concluding that, the stability of Iraq is the stability of America is also a fallacious argument since these are two independent countries thus the stability of one does not guarantee the stability of the other. It cannot be assumed that Americans live in freedom thus it becomes a fallacy for Bush to compare freedom in terms of the freedom of the Americans. He says that it will be important for the people of Iraq to live in …show more content…
The two arguments are contradicting each other it becomes fallacious (Haase, 2009). Thus it can be said that his statements at that moment are a form of fallacy. It is a big fallacy to assume that, upon independence, the people of Iraq will live with much freedoms and rights. This is because the president is taken to mean that, if the nation is not under any security threat, the citizens will be able to enjoy freedom and have their rights protected. It fallacious to assume so since being independent does not necessarily mean that they enjoy rights and freedoms in their nation (Haase,
Name
Institutional Affiliation A fallacy is an argument that uses poor reasoning. In other words, a fallacy is a mistake in belief which is based on unsound reasoning and arguments (Van, 2011). This paper will be analyzing a certain speech by George W Bush to identify the various fallacies in the entire speech. It is a fallacy to term the American people as the God chosen people (Van, 2011). Bush in his speech terms his people as the God chosen people. It is very clear that, at this time there was a lot of violence in Iraq. It is a fallacy for Bush to say that Iraq is far much stable. It is a fallacy because; at the same time Bush is ending troops to Iraq. How can one send troops to a nation where there is stability in all aspects? (Van, 2011).
Concluding that, the stability of Iraq is the stability of America is also a fallacious argument since these are two independent countries thus the stability of one does not guarantee the stability of the other. It cannot be assumed that Americans live in freedom thus it becomes a fallacy for Bush to compare freedom in terms of the freedom of the Americans. He says that it will be important for the people of Iraq to live in …show more content…
The two arguments are contradicting each other it becomes fallacious (Haase, 2009). Thus it can be said that his statements at that moment are a form of fallacy. It is a big fallacy to assume that, upon independence, the people of Iraq will live with much freedoms and rights. This is because the president is taken to mean that, if the nation is not under any security threat, the citizens will be able to enjoy freedom and have their rights protected. It fallacious to assume so since being independent does not necessarily mean that they enjoy rights and freedoms in their nation (Haase,