During the presentation of arguments, the failure of logic in the development of reasonable arguments poses the risk of fallacy. Fallacious arguments lack philosophical reasoning and follow emotional feelings other than logic. Inductive inferencing entails the allocation of evidence to the premise part in sentence structure. Arrangement of logics in inductive inferencing accords more emphasis to the premise clause while the conclusion part acts as the complimentary. The subject of drug illegitimacy attracts the argument of various critiques, many of whom address the subject with fallacious arguments. The use of fallacy and inductive inferencing aim at achieving an intended purpose.
The Evidential Fallacy from the Article
The attached article contains fallacious argument. The fallacy manifests in the article through the action of the author in comparing evils caused by cocaine with the effects of alcohol. The author makes a dangerous attempt to argue that alcohol has negative effects just as other drugs, and yet it is illegal (Huemer, 2009). The arguments of the author in discrediting the illegality of cocaine and heroin based on the fact that alcohol is legal are fallacious. Alcohol indeed has negative effects just as cocaine and heroin. However, it is fallacious to justify that cocaine and heroin should be legal only because alcohol is legal.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Potential Reasons for the Use of the Fallacy
The reason the author uses fallacy in the article is to emphasize the irrelevance of law in defining the harmful drugs. The author uses the fallacy to depict that the law is not accurate in defining the illegality of harmful substances in the body (Huemer, 2009). The author supports the rationale of using the fallacy by arguing that the cooking oil causes life-threatening conditions, yet it is legal. The fallacy aims at discrediting the existing measures of the legality of substances.
Inductive Inference from the Article
The author of the article has used generalized inferencing. The author argues, "Conservatives tend to be more strongly influenced than liberals by the last three." The premise of this statement carries the logical mass of the sentence, while the conclusion parts appear a compliment (Huemer, 2009). The logic argument of the above statement is "strong influence on conservatives." The logical part of the sentence is the premise.
Reconstructing the Inductive Inference Pattern
The original statement reads, "Conservatives tend to be more strongly influenced than liberals by the last three." The statement can be reconstructed, begin with, the conclusion, and end with the premise (Huemer, 2009). The final statement would then read, "The last three tend to have a strong influence on conservatives than on liberals."
Conclusively, the author of the article is fallacious in arguing that cocaine and heroin should be legal because alcohol is legal. The reason for the use fallacy is to discredit the existing legal provisions on discerning the harmful substance with harmless. The author has used Inductive Inferencing in the article to emphasize the influence of hard drugs on critiques.
Reference
Huemer, M. (2009): The drugs laws don't work. The philosopher's magazine.
