Question

Ralph claims that the author of a well‑documented study on lead impacts is unqualified, discounting the author's results. This approach is an example ofJenny claims that a pesticide is safe because it replaces a pesticide that was toxic to exposed children. This statement is an example ofSebastian argues that a chemical is unsafe and should be banned because it has demonstrated toxicity at some concentrations. This argument is an example ofEloise states that a chemical is safe because it was approved by the federal government under the Toxic Substances Control Act. This statement is an example ofNadine argues against action on lead contamination in drinking water because it is impossible to fully understand the many factors that affect levels of lead in drinking water. This argument is an example ofAnton claims that a pesticide is safe because exposed humans did not display acute symptoms of adverse effects. This claim is an example of

Answer 1

1. adhominem attack
2. red herring
3. false dichotomy
4. appeal to authority
5. appeal to ignorance
6. hasty generalization

Step-by-step explanation:

All the sentences shown in the question above are examples of logical fallacies, which are confusing and poorly organized arguments that seek to present a false concept as true, deceiving the listener. The explanation for each of these fallacies is:

Adhominem attack: Occurs when the argument criticizes the author of an opposing argument rather than criticizing the content of that argument.

Red herring: Occurs in arguments that seek to divert the listeners' attention from a very important subject, citing random things and out of context.

False dichotomy: It is an argument that presents a false dilemma, that is, this type of argument presents two situations that are opposite options, as the only possible options.

Appeal to authority: Occurs when the argument appeals to the reputation of something or someone, instead of the quality of content that these elements present.

Appeal to ignorance: Occurs when the argument tries to present something false as true, using incorrect evidence, the result of ignorance, that is, lack of knowledge about something.

Hasty generalization: Occurs when the arrangement presents a foregone conclusion about something or someone, without evaluating all the elements that must be observed for a conclusion to be made.