Identifying flaws

msruby1981

I'm trying to identify flaws. is PT 56 S3 Q10 an equivocation flaw; can you use more than a word but a concept in this type of flaw?
Is PT 52 S3 Q4 a false appeal flaw?
Is PT 54 S4 Q16 an implication flaw ?
thanks

TwentyStarGeneral

It is good to learn, memorize, and continually review the major flaws. However, a lot of the questions in the flaw family will have flaws that don't fall into one of those exact categories. So, it's good to be flexible in your thinking. When reading questions with arguments, I first look for one of the standard flaws. If I haven't seen one, I ask myself a question that attacks the central flaw, "What if X?"

PT56 S3 Q10 - false to answer an important question -- this is actually a common pattern. To paraphrase it, "We're popular, because we are as popular as this other thing in the same category." There is a question that needs to be answered though: how popular is that other thing? If it is not popular, then the conclusion doesn't follow.

PT52 S3 Q4 - has a flawed assumption and, again, a question that is not answered. What if the research is cited by those popular news outlets, because it's actually good? If it is, that weakens the argument.

PT54 S4 Q16 - has a gap in the argument between "growing incentive" in the premise and "will surely be built" conclusion. What if the incentive will never grow enough to justify the project?

So, all three questions follow a similar pattern of having a big question that is left unanswered and that wrecks the argument if it is answered in the negative.