@ayoubiii I thought of it more as, a reasonable assumption wont prompt any follow up questions that could break the argument down.

Assumption 1: Tigers are Mammals.

Follow up question: What do you consider a mammal?

Answer: (Insert definition of mammal here).

- Verses -

Assumption 2: Aggressiveness and the potential to cause serious injuries to people make an animal unsuitable as a pet.

Follow up question: what do you consider to be aggressive, what other behaviors are being assumed to indicate a 'potential to cause serious injuries' besides aggressiveness, what makes an animal 'suitable' to be kept as a pet, what do you define as a pet?

Answer: when I get nervous or scared of an animal (a subjective and personal response), loud noises or growling (a subjective and personal response), etc.

Point is that all the questions that COULD be asked, prompt an opinionated or subjective response, while the premise 'Tigers are mammals,' doesn't prompt anything but a widely agreed upon fact.