Question

My history professor is recognized as an expert on the Kennedy assassination. He said in class that there had to be a second shooter on the grassy knoll. Therefore, there had to be another shooter, meaning Oswald was framed. This argument falls prey to which type of logical fallacy?

• A. Ad Hominem
• B. Confusing cause and effect
• C. Post Hoc
• D. Bandwagon
• E. Appeal to Authority

Hint:

Always assess the argument itself, not just the authority making the claim. An argument can be flawed even if made by an expert.

Answer 1

Answer: (E)

Step 1: Understanding the fallacy.
The argument relies on the professor's authority as an expert to support the claim about the second shooter, which is an example of the appeal to authority fallacy.

Step 2: Analyzing the options.
- (A) Ad Hominem: This fallacy attacks the person making an argument rather than the argument itself, which is not the case here.
- (B) Confusing cause and effect: This occurs when a correlation is mistaken for causation, but this is not the case in this argument.
- (C) Post Hoc: This fallacy assumes that because one event follows another, the first caused the second. This does not apply to this scenario.
- (D) Bandwagon: This fallacy suggests something is true because many people believe it, which is not relevant here.
- (E) Appeal to Authority: The argument relies on the professor's expertise to validate the claim, which is a classic example of this fallacy.

Step 3: Conclusion.
Option (E) is correct because the argument uses the professor's expertise as the sole reason for accepting the claim, which is a textbook example of the appeal to authority fallacy.