QUESTION TEXT: Politician: My opponent says our zoning laws…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The politician argues his opponent is wrong.
REASONING: The opponent doesn’t practice what he preaches.
ANALYSIS: This is an ad hominem attack. That never makes for a good argument.
- There wasn’t really any characterization of his opponent’s lifestyle: he just said he lived in the country. He didn’t say “beautiful countryside” or anything like that.
- Huh? The argument didn’t hinge on where apartment buildings could be built.
- This is irrelevant, just as the opponent’s living situation is irrelevant. We should only care about the quality of the argument.
- CORRECT. The argument is good or bad because of its reasoning. It doesn’t matter how the opponent lives.
- This is irrelevant, just as it is irrelevant that he now lives in a house. We need to assess an argument’s reasons instead.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions