The fallacies of misdirected and emotional appeals bad arguments becausemisdirected appeals are arguments that “appeals to a questionable authority”. Fallacies of misdirected appeals are bad arguments because the statement is misdirecting the reader by the use of a questionable person of authority in a different subject matter that is not in their field of expertise, thus providing non-supporting evidence for the conclusion
.An emotional appeal is an “argument that appeals to fear”. Fallacies of emotional appeals are bad arguments because they are based on emotions rather than on valid or supporting evidence.
Emotional appeals are used to create a sense of fear into the audience, thus the reactions of the audience are based on their emotions and uncertainties rather than supporting evidence to formulate an educated and unbiased opinion or conclusion
Learn more about argument here:brainly.com/question/3775579
#SPJ4
Well here are things you can measure in SI units: volume, mass, length, density
Answer:
The politician structure of Japan at this time wasn’t heard it from the major air and was increasingly dominated by the military doing the Michi. The government was controlled by a small William crew with elder statesman who had overthrown the shogun gone and establish the new centralized Japanese state.
Explanation:
Answer:
This is an example of marginal analysis, as the decisions made by Raphael are on margin.
Explanation:
The decision of Raphael about pool versus bike time is totally a "how-much decision". It is clear that pool time and bike time can both reduce the time for race. However, the efficiency of pool time is high currently, and hence there is much sense in trying to spend more time in the pool and less on bike. This however makes no sense that all the time is spent in the pool and no time biking. Raphael only intends to alter the number of hours spend on each activity at the margin.
The statement is true. In the case Feiner v. New York, Chief
Justice Fred Vinson discussed in his opinion that the Court has used the “clear
and present danger” principle. The chief justice believes that the arrest of
Feiner was necessary in order to protect “the interest of the community in
maintaining peace and order on its streets”.