Final answer:
The logical fallacy in the example about choosing a major in history is a hasty generalization as it assumes making a lot of money is the only relevant outcome of education.
Step-by-step explanation:
The informal logic fallacy being committed in the example "Why would you major in history, you aren't going to make a lot of money doing that." is not related to attacking a person directly (ad hominem), distorting someone's argument to make it easier to attack (straw man), or falsely claiming that limited options are the only options (false dichotomy). It's an example of a hasty generalization, a fallacy of weak induction that draws a conclusion using insufficient evidence, suggesting that because a major in history is not typically associated with high earnings, it should not be pursued at all, ignoring other values or potential outcomes of such an education.