Question

Determine whether the fallacy committed by the following argument is a formal fallacy or informal fallacy.

Argument: If Rasputin was really mad, then he deceived Czar Nicholas II. Rasputin was not really mad. Therefore, he did not deceive Czar Nicholas II.

Answer 1

The argument makes an informal fallacy by unwarrantedly assuming that madness is a necessary condition for deception, which is not logically justified.

Step-by-step explanation:

Presented commits an informal fallacy:

The argument presented commits an informal fallacy, specifically a fallacy of unwarranted assumption. The conclusion that Rasputin did not deceive Czar Nicholas II based on the premise that Rasputin was not really mad is faulty because the truth of Rasputin deceiving the czar is not logically dependent on Rasputin's mental state.

Formal fallacies are concerned with the form or structure of an argument, whereas informal fallacies arise from problems in the content, such as the use of evidence or the assumptions made. In this case, the argument assumes that being mad is a necessary condition for Rasputin to deceive, which is an unwarranted assumption needing further justification. Therefore, the absence of madness does not logically guarantee that deception did not occur.