Ad hominem
Ad hominem is a term used to refer to the many types of arguments that are fallacious in most circumstances. Dr. Tendros Adhanom claims to have been racially abused can be classified as an “ad hominem” fallacy because he attacks the persons making the argument instead of the argument itself. He bases his argument on the character of Taiwanese people. The people abused Dr. Tendros because of his race but not of any arguments he had made. By defending China and belittling Taiwan despite the pandemic’s state in these two states also display Dr. Tedro as an ad hominem fallacious as he is also widely accused by the rest of world leaders. He should adopt a better way of presenting his views through a better argumentation means that he does not fall into a conflict every time he makes his statement. Adopt better ways, such as posing questions, before making a statement.
The UN argument is a straw man argument because they take the Singaporean politicians’ argument of the death penalty as an effective way of dealing with drug trafficking. They exaggerate it and then attack the Singaporean politician causing a mismatch between the two sides. The UN argues as advocating for human rights and ignoring the Singapore death sentence as one which goes against human rights. Yes, the straw man fallacy is a commonsense winner not principally due to its enticing force yet instead because it focuses on the down to earth psychological inferential abilities of the Singaporean while enhancing UN officials’ prestige. There is no reasonable proof that the utilization of the death penalty for such wrongdoings goes about as more impediment than long term detainment. UN debate came out with a logical policy throughout the done debate.