Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumAd Hominem (Source Argument)

Food Critic: Chef Rossi recently published a review criticizing the new Brasserie Luna, arguing that its menu is overpriced and its dishes lack authenticity. However, Chef Rossi himself owns a chain of casual dining restaurants that are notorious for charging premium prices for meals made from completely inauthentic, mass-produced ingredients. Therefore, Rossi's critique of Brasserie Luna is completely unfounded.

Which of the following best describes the logical flaw in the food critic's reasoning?

  1. A
    attacks the underlying motives behind Chef Rossi's review rather than evaluating the accuracy of his claims regarding the new restaurant
  2. B
    relies on a subtle shift in the meaning of the term 'authentic' from describing the sourcing of ingredients to describing the overall dining experience
  3. rejects the validity of a critique solely by highlighting that the author of the critique engages in the very practices being condemnedAnswer
  4. D
    relies on an unstated assumption that casual dining establishments are fundamentally incapable of serving authentic dishes
  5. E
    presumes, without providing sufficient justification, that utilizing mass-produced ingredients causes a restaurant's menu items to be overpriced

Answer

The argument rejects the validity of a critique solely by highlighting that the author of the critique engages in the very practices being condemned.
The argument concludes that Chef Rossi's review is unfounded based entirely on the fact that Rossi's own restaurants exhibit the same negative qualities he is criticizing. This is a classic 'tu quoque' ad hominem flaw: dismissing an argument because the person making it acts hypocritically, rather than addressing the actual evidence or logic of the argument itself.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that Chef Rossi's critique of Brasserie Luna is completely unfounded.
Finding the main conclusion is essential to analyzing how the author builds their argument.
2
Identify the premise used to support the conclusion.
The premise is that Chef Rossi runs restaurants that are guilty of the exact same things he criticized (charging high prices for inauthentic food).
Understanding the evidence provided reveals the logical structure.
3
Evaluate the logical connection between the premise and the conclusion.
The argument incorrectly assumes that Rossi's hypocritical behavior invalidates the factual claims he made in his review.
A logical flaw occurs when the premise fails to adequately support the conclusion.
4
Categorize the specific flaw.
This is a 'tu quoque' (you too) ad hominem fallacy. The argument dismisses a claim based on the hypocritical actions of the source rather than the merits of the claim itself.
Matching the flaw to an abstract description leads directly to the correct answer choice.

Key Concept

Ad Hominem (Tu Quoque / Hypocrisy)
Rate this question

Topics

Ad Hominem (Source Argument)

More questions from this topic