Question

Cindy argues with her friend Rowena about the superiority of cats over dogs as pets. To try to win the argument, Rowena tells a story about her friend Betty whose home was destroyed by a particularly unsocial and aggressive cat. According to the text, why should Cindy distrust this persuasive appeal?

Answer 1

Cindy should doubt Rowena's argument because it uses a singular anecdotal case to make a generalized claim about cats, which is a logical fallacy and appeals to emotion rather than reason.

Step-by-step explanation:

Cindy should be skeptical of Rowena's persuasive appeal that a cat destroyed someone's home because this is an anecdotal example that may not represent the typical behavior of cats. Using an extreme example to generalize about all cats is a logical fallacy. It detracts from a reasonable argument by appealing to emotion rather than reason, leading to sloppy associative reasoning. Instead, Cindy should look for more objective evidence and more representative examples when evaluating the superiority of cats as pets.

In debating, one should also be wary of ad hominem attacks, where an argument is discredited based on the personal characteristics of an individual rather than the merits of their position. Such tactics aim to manipulate the audience's emotions and distract them from the actual argument.