This question is incomplete. Here is the complete question:
‘All monkeys have tails’ is an absolute statement. True or False.
Answer:
The correct answer is True.
Explanation:
An Absolute Statement is a completely true statement that does not doubt anything that has been said. What has been said is a reality and cannot vary.
"All monkeys have tails" is something real. By nature all the monkeys have a tail and that is a fact, there is no possibility that anyone can believe that somewhere in the world the monkeys are born without a tail in a normal and usual way.
When an absolute statement can generate some type of doubt, you must have evidence to support your statement, otherwise your statement will lose logic.
Given this information we can say that the answer is True.
Yes, an absolute statement is one that leaves no room for variation; it's not relative or comparative.
All the clues make it evident that Carl is the thief.
Answer:
It is evident this word is usable.
Explanation:
Evident means, vaguely, "obvious and understandable." It is an adjective that can be added to any old sentence to show how something is such. Examples:
It is evident that the old man is not stupid.
I thought that Marcus was an athlete, but it wasn't perfectly evident.
A. Straw man
B. False Causality
C. Begging the question
D. Ad hominem
logical fallacy this example contains is "False Causality". The correct option is B.
False Causality, also known as a false cause or post hoc fallacy, occurs when a cause-and-effect relationship is incorrectly assumed based on a temporal sequence of events. In this example, the argument suggests that the decline in test scores is solely attributable to Caleb Mitchell becoming the senior class president, implying a cause-and-effect relationship between the two.
However, the argument fails to establish any direct causal link between Mitchell's presidency and the decline in test scores. It assumes that the correlation between these two events automatically implies causation, which is a logical fallacy. Other factors may contribute to the decline in test scores, such as changes in curriculum, student demographics, teaching methods, or external factors unrelated to Mitchell's presidency.
Let's examine why the other options are not true:
A. Straw man:
A straw man fallacy occurs when someone misrepresents or distorts an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. This is not applicable in the given example because there is no misrepresentation or distortion of an opposing argument.
C. Begging the question:
Begging the question, also known as circular reasoning, occurs when an argument assumes its conclusion within its premise. In this example, the argument is not guilty of begging the question because it does not explicitly assume its conclusion within its premise.
D. Ad hominem:
Ad hominem is a fallacy where an argument attacks a person's character or personal traits instead of addressing the actual argument. While the argument in the example may involve a negative evaluation of Mitchell's performance as a class president, it does not primarily rely on attacking Mitchell's character. Therefore, it is not an example of ad hominem.
Therefore, the logical fallacy present in the example is False Causality because it assumes a cause-and-effect relationship between Mitchell becoming the senior class president and the decline in test scores without establishing any direct evidence or considering other potential factors.
To learn more about fallacy click:
#SPJ7
Answer: falsecausality fallacy
Explanation:
A false casuality fallacy is based on the mistaken assumption that one event leads to another, the first even caused the second. Because test scores have fallen dramatically since caleb mitchell became senior class president, that mitchell has done a terrible job as a president. Basically because test scores went down, Mitchell is a bad president