Answer is L please give me brainliest answer
There are many fallacies in this statement. Primarily, the statement uses fallacy that pertains to hasty generalizations that are made from a small sample that is too vague and biased. Another fallacy at work here is the fallacy of appeal to tradition.
<h3>
What fallacy is present in the statement?</h3>
- The particular statement talks about abortion rights in the U.S. and seeks to provide a constitutional basis for the lack of abortion rights for abortion-seeking people in the United States of America.
- The first fallacy is the fallacy of hasty generalizations.
- Sweeping and hasty generalizations and conclusions are made from a relatively small, biased, and vague sample size that does not reflect the full context of the example cited.
- Another fallacy present in the argument is the fallacy that pertains to appeal to tradition.
- Appeal to tradition is applied to arguments where an event or statement is confirmed to be valid and reasonable solely because it has some historical precedent and has been continuing for years, as a tradition.
- Appeal to tradition operates here as a fallacy since the argument seems to make the claim that since abortion has not been obtained through constitutional means, instances of the same can be ruled out totally to make a convenient argument against abortion rights.
Therefore, the argument exhibits two fallacies namely, hasty generalizations and an appeal to tradition.
Learn more about a fallacy here: brainly.com/question/20939336
#SPJ2
Maria's confusion may be due to a process from Piaget's theory known as accommodation.
Accommodation refers to the cognitive process wherein an individual's existing schema (such as long-haired people are girls) no longer works and needs to be modified to deal with new situations or objects. In this example, Maria's schema or existing knowledge of whom long-haired people are no longer includes just girls, it has now been modified to include boys too.
Answer:
D.The Supreme Court orders recounts in random states after each election.
Explanation:
The Supreme Court orders recounts in random states after each election explains the significance of the Bush v. Gore ruling.
The votes for each candidate were tied and each state had a different way of recounting votes.
