¡¡¡¡The arguer offers two options£º either restrict freedom of speech£¬ or lose th
¡¡¡¡e country. He hopes the reader will assume that these are the only options a
¡¡¡¡vailable. This is unwarranted. He does not state how the so-called ¡°subversi
¡¡¡¡ve elements¡° would destroy the country£¬ nor for that matter£¬ why they would
¡¡¡¡want to destroy it. There may be a third option that the author did not ment
¡¡¡¡ion£» namely£¬ that society may be able to tolerate the ¡°subversives¡± and it m
¡¡¡¡ay even be improved by the diversity of opinion they offer. The answer is £¨C
¡¡¡¡£©¡£
¡¡¡¡Appeal To Authority
¡¡¡¡To appeal to authority is to cite an expert's opinion as support for one's o
¡¡¡¡wn opinion. This method of thought is not necessarily fallacious. Clearly£¬ t
¡¡¡¡he reasonableness of the argument depends on the ¡°expertise¡± of the person b
¡¡¡¡eing cited and whether she is an expert in a field relevant to the argument.
¡¡¡¡Appealing to a doctor's authority on a medical issue£¬ for example£¬ would be
¡¡¡¡reasonable£» but if the issue is about dermatology and the doctor is an orth
¡¡¡¡opedist£¬ then the argument would be questionable.
¡¡¡¡Personal Attack
¡¡¡¡In a personal attack £¨ad hominem£©£¬ a person's character is challenged instea
¡¡¡¡d of her opinions.
¡¡¡¡Example£º
¡¡¡¡Politician£º How can we trust my opponent to be true to the voters£¿ He isn't
¡¡¡¡true to his wife£¡
¡¡¡¡This argument is weak because it attacks the opponent's character£¬ not his p
¡¡¡¡ositions. Some people may consider fidelity a prerequisite for public office
¡¡¡¡¡¡ History£¬ however£¬ shows no correlation between fidelity and great politica
¡¡¡¡l leadership.
¡¡¡¡¡ª¡ª
¡¡¡¡I would fly you to the moon and back
¡¡¡¡If you'll be if you'll be my baby
¡¡¡¡Got a ticket for a worldswhereswe belong
¡¡¡¡So would you be my baby
