Final answer:
The fallacy in the provided statement is an ad hominem because it attacks the speaker's character rather than the content of the speech. Such arguments should be assessed based on their empirical evidence and logical coherence, without regard to the speaker's personal beliefs.
Step-by-step explanation:
The fallacy presented in the statement "Pryor's speech against gun control is flat-out nonsense because I know he doesn't even believe that stuff himself" is an ad hominem fallacy. This type of fallacy occurs when the argument is deflected to the character of the person making the argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. In this case, whether or not Pryor truly believes his stance on gun control is irrelevant to the validity of the arguments he presents in his speech.
It's important to focus on the actual evidence and reasoning used in the speech rather than making assumptions about Pryor's personal beliefs. This kind of rational approach involves examining whether the claims are supported by empirical data, if the reasoning is logically coherent, and if there are no unfounded assumptions or defeaters. Belief does not imply knowledge, and it's critical to differentiate between the two when analyzing arguments on controversial topics like gun control.