Below are four original arguments and four flawed rebuttals. Match each original argument to the rebuttal that commits a Straw Man fallacy against it by distorting or exaggerating its claims.
- City Councilperson: We should redirect a portion of the highway expansion funds toward upgrading our urban bicycle infrastructure to improve traffic flow.The proposal to ban all cars from the city center and force everyone to commute by bicycle is completely impractical given our climate.
- Department Head: Allowing employees to telecommute for two days each week could significantly boost morale and productivity.If we permanently close the office and transition to an entirely virtual company, we will completely destroy our collaborative team culture.
- Nutritionist: For optimal long-term health, individuals should make an effort to moderate their intake of highly processed carbohydrates.This perspective is dangerous; demanding that people eliminate all carbohydrates from their diet deprives them of essential energy sources.
- Educational Consultant: High school curricula should include introductory financial literacy modules to help students understand basic budgeting.Expecting teenagers to master complex investment banking strategies and corporate accounting is an unreasonable burden to place on them.
Answer
Councilperson matches with the car ban rebuttal; Department Head matches with the office closure rebuttal; Nutritionist matches with the diet elimination rebuttal; Educational Consultant matches with the investment banking rebuttal.
Each correct pairing demonstrates a clear Straw Man fallacy. The rebuttals do not address the actual, moderate claims made in the original arguments. Instead, they attack exaggerated, extreme, or distorted versions of those claims (e.g., changing 'two days' to 'permanently close', or 'moderate' to 'eliminate').
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
A Straw Man fallacy occurs when an opponent's argument is misrepresented, exaggerated, or distorted to make it easier to attack.