Answer:
<u>false dilemma: </u>Increasing our city's debt to improve our roads is better than letting all our cars be destroyed because of all the pot holes.
<u>false analogy:</u> Driving to work instead of using public transportation is like not eating everything on your plate. It wastes valuable resources.
<u>ad hominem: </u>Our current mayor has been in politics for over 25 years. It is time that we have a younger mayor, so we can have fresh ideas to make our city better.
<u>red herring:</u> It is true that the city council did approve a tax for a new road construction project. However, our city needs to attract more businesses to stabilize our economy.
Explanation:
False dilemma occurs when the listener is asked to pick between two options as if no other one was available, when this is not the case. In this example, the author claims that debt or the destruction of all cars are the only options, when this is most likely not the case.
A false analogy occurs when two things are compared, but do not in fact share as many qualities as the author would want the audience to think. This is the case between the use of public transportation and eating everything on your plate.
Ad hominem is an overgeneralization. It occurs when an author implies that all things being discussed are the same, without significant evidence. In this case, the author implies that all young people have fresh ideas, and that all are more desirable than old people.
A red herring fallacy occurs when an author distracts the audience by introducing a completely separate and independent idea that is not related to the rest of the argument. In this case, the tax approved and the need for business are not related. The second topic is used as a distraction.
