Explain the informal fallacy by using an example of an argument that commits that fallacy.

Instructions:Write 3 paragraphs explaining the following:1. Define ONE SPECIFIC informal fallacy (i.e., “ad hominem,” “slippery slope” etc.) Make sure to use a formal definition and cite the source. Cite as (author, year, page number)2. Explain the informal fallacy by using an example of an argument that commits that fallacy. The example of the argument should be in quotation marks. Or, provide your own example of an argument that commits the fallacy. Remember, you are USING the example to support your explanation of how the fallacy works, so explain the example briefly.3. Explain how the fallacy is a using faulty reasoning (i.e., explain WHY it is a bad form of reasoning). Give sufficient explanation to show your reader why that fallacy is irrational.4. Provide bibliography. Explain an informal fallacy.Reply to two classmates’ posts. One reply MUST include the following:* Provide an example of an argument that commits the fallacy that the classmate is explaining. This is to help your classmate further support their explanation of the fallacy. For example, if someone is writing about a Straw Man fallacy, explain an argument that commits the fallacy of a Straw Man. (Ill provide this after there posted. You can complete the assignment without this just save some space for the second page. 1 1/2 for the assignment and the remaining for the two classmate.)You may also use FallacyFiles.org for examples of fallacies. On the left-hand side of the web page, there is an “alphabetical list of fallacies” that you can search through.You may also use FallacyFiles.org for examples of fallacies. On the left-hand side of the web page, there is an “alphabetical list of fallacies” that you can search through.Professional writing tips:*Use signposting. The first sentence of each paragraph should indicate what the paragraph is about.* Follow structure: Write one topic per paragraph. Keep in mind that when you EXPLAIN an idea to your reader, you must first define it, explain it with examples, and then assess or critique it, in that order. Paragraphs should have one topic per paragraph. Never critique an argument before you explain it. Pretend that you are explaining to your friend who has committed a fallacy. Your friend does not know what is wrong with his way of thinking, so use details and examples to show your friend how the fallacy works, and give sufficient explanation of what is wrong with his reasoning. *Your first paragraph should include a formal definition of the particular fallacy from the required readings only. Cite the definition as (Author’s last name, year, page number). In your second paragraph, give an example of the argument that commits a fallacy. If you use examples from the internet, you must use quotation marks and include proper citation and bibliography. Alternatively, you can give your own example of a fallacy. Examples help illustrate to the reader how a fallacy works and helps you apply the concepts to your own life. Fallacies always involve arguments, with faulty reasoning from the premise to the conclusion. Thus, the example should be an argument not just a description of events. Use this example argument to help explain how the fallacy works.*Your third paragraph is an example of a critique (an argument that the fallacy is faulty). Your third paragraph should explain WHY the fallacy is a bad form of reasoning. Avoid general statements. Explain why the fallacy is faulty, not just the specific example.STRUCTURE:The structure of written work or conversations is important. Structure includes the chronological order of the content, and signposting to your reader about what you are talking about.Writing formally in proper structure will help you read and understand anything you read. The more you read and explain in your own words, the better you will be at understanding what you read. There is no shortcut: It is simply a matter of practice.All conversations (written or spoken) has a chronological order that moves from general topics (such as an introduction) to a more specific argument (such as your idea or critique). Paragraphs should contain ONE TOPIC PER PARAGRAPH. If any of the following components apply, they should be arranged in a particular order. For example, you would want to explain other’s arguments before you give your own argument. That way, your reader can understand the philosophical dilemma and options for answers, before understanding your own position.1. Thesis (an introductory thesis for short papers should only be 1-2 sentences long). A thesis tells your reader what you are going to discuss and and a one-sentence summary of your argument.Set up the scenario or philosophy dilemma for your reader.DEFINE any terms or formal definitions of theories.This might be your first paragraph, which should simply explain the philosophical puzzle to your reader who hasn’t read the material or thought about these issues. Here you are focusing on details. For example, suppose you want to examine whether Artificial Intelligence should take over jobs. Explain a bit of background so that your reader knows: What kinds of jobs are appropriate for AI? What jobs have AI taken already? Your first paragraph always sets up or introduces facts objectively. This includes explaining a dilemma, trolley problem, scenario or example, or some philosophical problem. That way, your reader is in the postilion to think about their own views before hearing what philosophers say or your own arguments.2. OUTLINE. Give an argument outline, in valid format. An argument outline is a list of premises and conclusion in valid modus ponens, or modus tollens format.3. EXPLAIN. Explain the topic, such as a philosopher’s argument. Explain sufficiently so that any non-philosopher can understand the argument. Explain thought experiments before you explain arguments.4. APPLY. As part of an explanation, paint a picture in your reader’s mind by giving analogies or examples of the argument. Apply the argument to your daily life and use examples from media or daily activities. Examples use a specific time and place, even if they are hypothetical. Avoid giving general statements or general examples.5. CRITIQUE: Assess whether the philosopher’s argument is valid, sound, or contains fallacies. It is better to give ONE CRITIQUE, fully explained, than to hint at several unexplained critiques.6. CREATE your own argument. State your position (for or against) in a short and clear thesis statement. Explain fully using analogies, thought experiments, scenarios, or examples. Invent your own thought experiments, such as Trolley Problems, to support your own argument.7. POSSIBLE OBJECTION. Explain a possible objection to your argument.8. REPLY. Reply to the possible objection.9. BIBLIOGRAPHY. SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION: Explanations should be your summaries in your own words. Pretend that you are explaining to your friend who has never heard of these ideas. Paragraphs should be 3-6 sentences long. Work at giving concise sentences with substantial information.Do not rely on your reader to fill in assumptions. Without sufficient explanation, you are not respecting the diversity of thought and other perspectives your reader may have.Use specific details and examples. Scenarios and examples are about a situation in a specific time and place, even if they are hypothetical or imagined.Explain fully, using details, analogies, and specific examples. Do not use general statements. Pretend that you are teaching a friend these theories, or aim at teaching a 6th grader. This will help you be very specific and explain all the steps in reasoning, without being pedantic or using overly academic terms.Read your paper out loud to catch run-on sentences (if you run out of breath reading a sentence, then you know it is a run-on sentence), incomplete sentences, grammar mistakes, and unorganized structure. Use a spell-checker.SIGNPOSTING:Signposting is like a roadmap for your reader, indicating to your reader what the paragraph is about. Without signposting, your essays read as a stream of consciousness.Avoid combining topics in one paragraph. Separate explanations of theories from your own argument. Separate explanations of theories from objections/ critiques against the theory. These represent changes in the dialectic. A dialectic is a back and forth (e.g. for or against; pro and con; argument and critique).Signposting is like a GPS for your reader to indicate what the paragraph is about. The first sentence of each paragraph should have some kind of signposting, which is like a mini thesis of that paragraph to signal to your reader what the paragraph is about.The first sentence of every paragraph should have some clear statement such as:”I will argue that. . .” (thesis)”Schick gives a definition of ________ as: . . .” (Define)”According to Mill, . . .” (Explain others’ arguments)”As an example of an argument that uses this kind of reasoning is. . .”(Apply the theory to explain)”There are problems with the theory of ___________. One problem is. . . .” (Critique)”Another problem is. . .” (Critique)”A possible objection is. . .” (Critique)”As a reply. . .” (Reply)”However. . . .” (Change in dialectic)Within your paragraph, use transition statements such as:”However. . .” (critique)”Since . . .” (explain)”Although . . .” (contrast)”In addition . . .” (explain)”Another example is . . .” (apply)”To apply this theory . . .” (apply)”It might seem that .. .” (contrast)