what type of fallacy is akavar commercial?
That tv commercial that states you can eat all you want and still lose weight and they wouldn't be able to say it on tv if it wasnt true. what type of fallacy is that? bandwagon fallacy? attack ad Hominem? False causality? red herring? overgeneralization?
1) umm I'd say red herring
2) It appears to be, at least partly, some sort of fallacy of presumption. Arguments that commit this fallacy presume what they purport to prove. In this case, the variety is probably 'begging the question'. The stated claim, "we wouldn't be able to say it on TV if it wasn't true" is actually only a premise. The implied conclusion is: What we say on TV is true. So the argument amounts to: P1: We wouldn't be able to say it on TV if it wasn't true. P2: We are able to say it on TV. C: So, what we say is true. P1: If ~T, then ~S (If S, then T - by contraposition) P2: S C: So, T The conclusion says virtually the same thing as the premise, and provides little to no genuine support. The first premise is a conditional, but the conditional is affirmed merely by being on TV - without any other support. So, this argument probably commits the fallacy of 'begging the question'. It is somewhat similar to this example of 'begging the question': P1: Anyone who isn't an extreme athlete couldn't be a baseball player. C: So, Any baseball player is an extreme athlete.