The first argument is fallacious in that equates algebra classes with nightmares without founding on any kind of scientific or logical evidence. While the algebra classes might be a bit challenging and nightmares frightening dreams, we cannot conclusively make a ruling that the algebra classes are like bad dreams. The argument uses false analogy fallacy since the argument assumes that because algebra and nightmares share some similarities, they are automatically one and the same thing (Arp et al 2018).
In the second argument, Andrew is regarded as being a trustworthy person but people cannot trust his testimony. The contradictory argument employs the use of inductive reasoning, where we simply generalize Andrew’s trustworthy as being the reason as to why we cannot believe his testimony. Begging the question fallacy is mostly appropriate for the argument because as we try to argue out for the claim, we realize it is already assumed in the premise (Suurmond et al 2015). It is already assumed that since Andrew is trustworthy and he affirms it, we should not trust his testimony.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The fault with the third argument is the unproven assumption that relaxing office dressing code will automatically result in people coming to office naked. As much as showing up naked is the most likely situation we expect when dress codes are dismissed, it does not necessarily mean that everyone will come naked. This argument also uses intuitive thinking, where a verdict is passed without having evidence. The argument uses appeal of pity fallacy (Hansen & Fioret 2016), where the argument tries to gain acceptance highlighting a possible misfortune that can occur if the idea of relaxing dress codes is not adopted.
The fourth argument is faulty since the reason why there has been nobody to disapprove the existence of aliens is because there is actually nobody interested in aliens or their activities, while in real sense, aliens exist. The argument uses the appeal of ignorance, where the claim of existence of alien life must be accepted since nobody has disapproved it yet (Van 2015).
The last argument is faulty because it disqualifies the voting of both the democrats and the republicans based on whom they love or hate, without thinking of the other side of what either the democrats or republicans are capable of doing if voted in. The argument uses red herring fallacy (Paul & Elder 2019) as seen where irrelevant information such as hatred towards the poor and business owners has been used to distract the people from voting in the republicans and the democrats.
References
Arp, R., Barbone, S., & Bruce, M. (Eds.). (2018). Bad arguments: 100 of the most important fallacies in Western philosophy. John Wiley & Sons.
Hansen, H. V., & Fioret, C. (2016). A Searchable Bibliography of Fallacies–2016. Informal Logic, 36(4), 432-472.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2019). The thinker's guide to fallacies: The art of mental trickery and manipulation. Rowman & Littlefield.
Suurmond, J., Seeleman, C., & Essink-Bot, M. L. (2015). Analyzing Fallacies in Argumentation to Enhance Effectiveness of Educational Interventions: The Case of Care Providers' Arguments Against Using Professional Interpretation. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions , 35 (4), 249-254.
Van Eemeren, F. H. (2015). Fallacies as derailments of argumentative discourse acceptance based on understanding and critical assessment. In Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse (pp. 575-594). Springer, Cham.
