Identify the logical fallacy in each of the following examples. 1. What's the problem? All my friends have a curfew of midnight! ! 2. A person who is honest will not steal, so my client, an honest person, clearly is not guilty of theft. 3. Her economic plan is impressive, but remember: this is a woman who spent six weeks in the Betty Ford Center getting treatment for alcoholism. 4. Since Mayor Perry has been in office, our city budget has had a balanced budget; if he were governor, the state budget would finally be balanced. 5. If we outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. 6. Smoking is dangerous because it is harmful to your health. 7. He was last year's MVP, and he drives a Volvo. That must be a great car. 8. A national study of grades 6–8 showed that test scores went down last year and absenteeism was high; this generation is going to the dogs.​

the autor of the text is bringing the point that one achievment of the president john f. kennedy was a success and this caused the next president to use a similar idea. the purposefor the use of the quotation in the text is to support the idea that peace corps was a result of the president's call. in this case, the quotation is presented as part of the writing and does not stand on its own.

answer a.

it u understand what he thought at the time and let u know more about him then what third person would of known probably. hope this : )

it probably should so i can spam dank memes

"character is what you are in the dark." dwight lyman moody, in this very witty quotation of his, states we act and think differently when we are "in the dark", that is, when the spotlight is not on us and everyone can see us and consequently judge us. when reading, we tend to be sympathetic to some characters and their dilemmas. by being so, we are saying to ourselves that we agree with those characters' acts and choices, even if they are morally questionable if we have common sense in mind. dwight lyman moody's quotation applies very well to "crime and punishment", by   19th century russian writer fiodor dostoyevsky. raskolnikov, the main character, a former law student who spends his days reflecting upon life and its misery, draws a fatal conclusion: mankind is divided in two main categories: ordinary and extraordinary people. the first are the ones who lead a run-of-the-mill existence and are full of imperfections; the latter are the ones who are spiritually superior, the ones who always know better, and have the right to judge the ordinary ones, as well as eliminate them if for common good. raskolnikov considers himself as belonging to the extraordinary category and decides to kill an old lady who is a money lender and in whose house he rents a small room. raskolnikov compares himself to napoleon, who had the undeniable right to execute tons of people during the war in order to save his nation. of course what the main character decides to do is a horrendous crime, but as readers we feel it is the right thing for him to do, since the victim is a mean old woman who only thinks about money and keeps humiliating her younger sister. what one experiences is a mixture of sympathy and empathy for the character, even though he decides to commit homicide, which is not at all accepted or tolerated by civilized citizens. however, since readers are "in the dark", they allow themselves to feel in ways they would probably never dare to confess to anyone, no matter how nasty or vicious a character can be. after all, they are just reading and doing no harm. in other words, readers are in the dark and can be who they are without being judged.