The fallacious argumentative strategy involves discrediting someone, labeling them a liar, to undermine their argument. This ad hominem attack avoids addressing the argument's merits and weakens the discourse. (option C)
A fallacious argumentative strategy in persuasion or debate is exemplified by option C—calling someone a liar to discredit both the individual and their argument.
This ad hominem tactic involves attacking the person rather than addressing the substance of their argument. It aims to tarnish credibility and divert attention from the actual points being made.
Such tactics hinder constructive discourse by focusing on personal attacks rather than reasoned debate. Recognizing and avoiding such fallacies is crucial for fostering meaningful and respectful discussions in any discourse or debate setting.
The complete question is:
Which of the following best describes a fallacious argumentative strategy in the context of persuasion or debate?
A. Using the fact that a few people agree with you to validate an argument
B. Using the fact that many people agree with you to validate an argument
C. Calling someone a liar in order to discredit them, and by association, their argument
D. Using the fact that an authority figure agrees with you to validate an argument
E. Reducing the argument to an absurd set of parameters to make your argument appear valid