Question

Read this excerpt from a passage.

Unfortunately, saving elephants had a negative economic effect on some people. In 1999, in response to pressure from business interests that were losing money because of the ban on the ivory trade, CITES allowed limited trade in stockpiled tusks. Ivory that already had been harvested from elephants could once again be bought and sold. But disaster for the African elephant followed. Poachers, or illegal hunters, rushed to kill more elephants. Many people had foreseen that illegal trading of ivory would flourish again if any trading at all were allowed. Following the CITES decision, African elephants died in large numbers. A 2014 New York Times editorial reported that approximately 30,000 to 35,000 African elephants were killed each year. Only a complete ban of the ivory trade can save the African elephant from extinction.
Which type of logical fallacy appears in this excerpt?

A Fallacy of the single cause


B Post hoc fallacy


C Reversing causal direction


D Cherry picking

Answer 1

CITES is the protection treaty for wild animals and plants. In the excerpt about the hunting of elephants, the reversing causal direction is the type of logical fallacy. Thus, option C is accurate.

What is a logical fallacy?

A logical fallacy is a reasoning error that is because by insufficient logic. Its presence in the excerpt or writing can cause contradictions from the factual information and question the credibility of the text.

In the excerpt, it seems that elephants are the cause of the problems faced by the illegal hunters and business of the ivory trade, and not the opposite is true. This made the excerpt have a logical fallacy that ended in the elephant becoming the cause of the issue.

Therefore, in option C  the reversing of the causal direction is the logical fallacy.

Learn more about logical fallacy here:

https://brainly.com/question/27682482

#SPJ1