The two rhetorical statements use so-called authorities to back them up. What is that called?
The two fallacy questions use (or misuse?) statistics to back them up. What is that called?
I have 4 out of 50 questions left...I cannot figure out the last two rhetorical questions, or the last two fallacy questions. What type of rhetorical device are these?
1. Very little research has been done using properly matched groups with a control group, the gold standard of scientific studies, Ring-Cassidy says.
2. According to David C. Reardon, director of the Elliot Institute, which heads the PAS advocacy website , "As we educate [the public] about how abortion hurts women, it changes the whole equation.
What type of fallacy is each one of these?
1.Women experience depression after an abortion in equal or lesser percentages as those women following childbirth.
2. Many studies consider only short-term outcomes, are often based on questionnaires completed by women shortly after an abortion, and are administered by abortion providers who are biased in favor of a positive outcome, she says.
7 answers
Is it a proof surrogate(for rhetoric) and for fallacies is it a post hoc
I think you're right about surrogate, but I disagree with the fallacy.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/post-hoc.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/post-hoc.html
I am confused then, I originally thought it was an ad hominem...but then I moved to a smokescreen, but after reading a couple of inserts they did not make sense...I read the cite, and it (post hoc) defiantly does not fit. Maybe I am overanalyzing the definitions. When you say I might be right on proof surrogate for both my answers concerning rhetoric, is it right, or are you not sure?
Surrogate definitely fits the description I found.
The fallacy is not ad hominem. Carefully go through your list of fallacies to see which ones best fit the examples.
The fallacy is not ad hominem. Carefully go through your list of fallacies to see which ones best fit the examples.
I know it is a statistical fallacy, and it represents a false causality, I just can't seem to pinpoint the specific fallacy.Thank you for your time and help. I appreciated it.
This looks like hasty generlization