Self-paced
Columnist: The country is presently debating legislation that, if passed, would force manufacturers to increase the number of paid vacation days for employees, to pay higher overtime wages, and to pay all day-care expenses for children of each employee. ████ ███████████ ██ █████ █████████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ███████ ███████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ██ ███████████ ███ ███ ██████ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ████████ ██ ████ ██████ ████ ███████████ ███ ████ ██ ██████ ████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The columnist concludes that we must defeat a piece of legislation that would improve workers’ rights. Why? Because some supporters of the legislation belong to unsavory groups, or are facing tax-eviction charges.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is a cookie-cutter “ad hominem” flaw, where the argument attacks the source of a position rather than the position itself. In this case, the columnist is casting doubt on the character of the legislation’s supporters, instead of addressing the merits of the legislation.
4.
The columnist's argument is flawed ███████ ██
a
attacks legislation by ███████ ████ ████████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ ███ ███████████
The columnist isn’t calling into question the character of the “originators” who introduced this legislation, but rather that of its supporters.
b
assails legislation on ███ █████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████
The columnist concludes that we should reject legislation just because some of its supporters belong to violent groups or may have evaded taxes—in other words, because of the supporters’ questionable character.
c
attempts to discredit ███████████ ██ █████████ ██ ██████ █████████ ███ █████ ███ █████ ██ █████████ ████████
The columnist doesn’t bring up the possibility that anyone would be adversely affected by the legislation.
d
presupposes that legislation ██ ███ ███████████ ████████ ██ ███ ████ █ █████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ████████ ███████████ ████
The columnist never proposes a rule of when legislation is bad legislation. The argument also doesn’t ever mention how many or how few supporters the legislation has, whether inside or outside the legislative body.
e
rejects legislation on ███ ███████ ████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██████████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ █████████████ ████ █████ ████████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██████
The columnist doesn’t accuse the legislation’s supporters of acting inconsistently. The argument also never mentions the issue of burdening manufacturers, or whether the manufacturers’ success is important to anyone.