In which fallacy is the credibility of a murderer questioned based on the victim's reputation rather than the evidence?

In which fallacy is the credibility of a murderer questioned based on the victim's reputation rather than the evidence?

• A. Ad Hominem
• B. Begging the Question
• C. Inconsequent Argument
• D. Appeal to Ignorance

Answer: (A)

The reason the choice of Ad Hominem is correct in this context lies in the nature of the fallacy itself. Ad Hominem refers to arguments that attack a person's character or reputation rather than addressing the substance of the argument or the evidence presented. In this case, questioning the credibility of the murderer based on the victim's reputation means that the argument is diverting attention from the actual evidence of the case to focus instead on the victim’s character. This shift in focus undermines logical analysis and relies instead on personal attacks and irrelevant claims about the victim, which makes the argument fallacious. The other fallacies listed do not appropriately capture the essence of this situation. Begging the Question involves assuming the conclusion within the premises without providing valid support. Inconsequent Argument refers to conclusions that do not logically follow from the premises, and Appeal to Ignorance is about claiming something is true simply because it has not been proven false. None of these align with questioning a murderer’s credibility based on the victim’s reputation.

The reason the choice of Ad Hominem is correct in this context lies in the nature of the fallacy itself. Ad Hominem refers to arguments that attack a person's character or reputation rather than addressing the substance of the argument or the evidence presented. In this case, questioning the credibility of the murderer based on the victim's reputation means that the argument is diverting attention from the actual evidence of the case to focus instead on the victim’s character. This shift in focus undermines logical analysis and relies instead on personal attacks and irrelevant claims about the victim, which makes the argument fallacious.

The other fallacies listed do not appropriately capture the essence of this situation. Begging the Question involves assuming the conclusion within the premises without providing valid support. Inconsequent Argument refers to conclusions that do not logically follow from the premises, and Appeal to Ignorance is about claiming something is true simply because it has not been proven false. None of these align with questioning a murderer’s credibility based on the victim’s reputation.