Assignment 1
Using the wrong reasons. This reasoning violates the relevance criterion due to it not providing the right reasons for Karen Cox to be hired. Her being in the PTA, living in the community, having children in school, and loving to work with children are all good reasons to hire Karen, but not the right ones. They should have said something to the effect of “Karen Cox has a bachelor's degree in elementary education.” That would have provided us with a better reason to hire Karen.
Genetic Fallacy. This argument violates the relevance criterion due to the arguer providing reasons that are no longer relevant in present day circumstances. A long time ago, brides were only supposed to wear white if they were virgins. This no longer applies …show more content…
This particular argument violates the relevance criterion due to the person providing false reasons to make him/herself feel better about being left out of a skiing trip. Due to him/her proving false reasons, the conclusion is now invalid.
Rationalization. Once again, this argumenter provided false reasoning to prove his/her conclusion truthful. Just because Playboy had a great piece last month about Iraqi veterans suffering from PTSD doesn’t mean they will have another one this month. Since one of her premises proves to be false, it leads the reader to believe the conclusion to be a fallacy.
Drawing the Wrong Conclusions. This argument violates the relevance criterion due to the premises being irrelevant to the conclusion. The premises lead a reader to the conclusion of “don’t judge a book by it’s cover” or in other words “don’t judge a person by the number of degrees they have.” The conclusion the premises lead to is completely different than the one the arguer leads us to.
Drawing the Wrong Conclusions. Henry’s premises violate the relevance criterion due to them not supporting his conclusion at all. A person’s social life and whether a person’s diet is working have nothing to do with each other, which makes the argument fall apart. If the conclusion is irrelevant to the argument, then the premises are assumed to be
Using the wrong reasons. This reasoning violates the relevance criterion due to it not providing the right reasons for Karen Cox to be hired. Her being in the PTA, living in the community, having children in school, and loving to work with children are all good reasons to hire Karen, but not the right ones. They should have said something to the effect of “Karen Cox has a bachelor's degree in elementary education.” That would have provided us with a better reason to hire Karen.
Genetic Fallacy. This argument violates the relevance criterion due to the arguer providing reasons that are no longer relevant in present day circumstances. A long time ago, brides were only supposed to wear white if they were virgins. This no longer applies …show more content…
This particular argument violates the relevance criterion due to the person providing false reasons to make him/herself feel better about being left out of a skiing trip. Due to him/her proving false reasons, the conclusion is now invalid.
Rationalization. Once again, this argumenter provided false reasoning to prove his/her conclusion truthful. Just because Playboy had a great piece last month about Iraqi veterans suffering from PTSD doesn’t mean they will have another one this month. Since one of her premises proves to be false, it leads the reader to believe the conclusion to be a fallacy.
Drawing the Wrong Conclusions. This argument violates the relevance criterion due to the premises being irrelevant to the conclusion. The premises lead a reader to the conclusion of “don’t judge a book by it’s cover” or in other words “don’t judge a person by the number of degrees they have.” The conclusion the premises lead to is completely different than the one the arguer leads us to.
Drawing the Wrong Conclusions. Henry’s premises violate the relevance criterion due to them not supporting his conclusion at all. A person’s social life and whether a person’s diet is working have nothing to do with each other, which makes the argument fall apart. If the conclusion is irrelevant to the argument, then the premises are assumed to be