Max Sterling, the world-renowned professional tennis champion, recently stated in an interview that taking daily high doses of Vitamin C prevents all common viruses. Since Max Sterling is clearly an elite physical specimen whose body is in peak condition, his claim about the efficacy of high-dose Vitamin C must be correct.
The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it:
- bases a conclusion on the claims of an authority whose expertise is not relevant to the subject at issueAnswer
- Binfers a causal relationship between two phenomena solely on the basis of a statistical correlation
- Cfails to recognize that a key term is used in two distinctly different senses within the reasoning
- Dincorrectly assumes that what is true of an entire group must also be true of each individual member of that group
- Erejects a claim by attacking the personal characteristics of the person making the claim rather than addressing the substance of the claim itself
Answer
The argument bases a conclusion on the claims of an authority whose expertise is not relevant to the subject at issue.
The argument commits an illegitimate appeal to authority. It concludes that a scientific, medical claim about viruses is true simply because it was asserted by an elite professional tennis player. While Max Sterling is an expert in his sport, athletic success does not provide one with specialized medical expertise. Therefore, his authority is completely irrelevant to the subject matter at hand.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Appeal to Unqualified Authority
Estimated Time:1m 0s