Question

Identifying particular Fallacy of Relevance and briefly explain [reproducing/highlighting words or phrases from original text of question] the reason for your selection:

I remember it was 1985 General Election which was non-party based and the political parties received it very coldly. So people of our area got enthusiastic when they heard “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan” is contesting for parliament seat. I also remember majority of families living in that area were directly or indirectly earning their means through different ventures of “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan”. He was seeking consent of “his” families for their vote. The agents of the estate, who were working for him talked, “naturally, no one will be forced to vote for the “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan”, that’s understood; in the same way that no one, naturally, can force “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan” to allow people who don’t vote for him to work on his land/in his ventures. This is the period of real liberty for everybody; you’re free, and so is ‘he’.” The announcement of these “liberal” principles produced general and understandable anxiety among the families. For, as may easily be guessed, “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan” was the most hated person in our part of the country.

Answer 1

"The fallacies of relevance" simply do not justify the validity of the conclusions. Although frequently used to attempt to convince people by illogical reasoning, only ignorant minds, predisposed minds and the gullible may be deceived by their "illegitimate appeals".

Explanation:

• "Irrelevant Conclusion (ignoratio elenchi)"
• The "fallacy of the irrelevant conclusion" tries to "establish the truth" of a "proposition" by "offering an argument" which in actual "offers" "support" for a wholly "different conclusion".
• The "Fallacy of irrelevant conclusion" here is : "For, as may easily be guessed, “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan” was the most hated person in our part of the country." (the conclusion)
• This is because, here the "premises may support" "some conclusion" concerning "non-political parties" contesting for elections", generally, however,  it does not "secure the truth" of a "conclusion" "focused" on “Wadera/Chaudhary/Sardar/Khan” alone & not on what was first stated about the 1985 election & how had the political parties received it".
• Though "fallacious", this can succeed in "distracting its audience" from the point which is actually the issue.

To know more

Identifying particular Fallacy of Relevance and briefly explain ...

brainly.in/question/18185328