Fallacies and the Rhetorical Appeal, Examples of Fallacies and Logos
In the article, Dumpsters, Muffins, Waste and Law. This diagram was established based off of statistics. The diagram suggests that in regards to food at the level of the consumer is unevenly distributed geographically and globally. This is an example of a fallacy because there is no hard evidence to prove that these countries are being inconsiderate in regards to food waste. The only thing it says is that it is statistically proven that this information is accurate; based off what information though. The argument has no good reasoning and it is also invalid.
As the authors discuss the "Muffinman case" they explain how: "for years the supermarket had accepted that De Geynst took from their dumpster and in its verdict the Court of Appeal took into account that there had been a misunderstanding about whether this permission had been discontinued." The fallacy is that in this argument the authors are trying to make a statement claiming that the supermarket had allowed the man to scavenge through their dumpsters, but under what grounds? No where in the article does it say that the supermarket was interviewed or quoted. When connecting this type of fallacy to the rhetorical appeal in regards to pathos, ethos and logos. Being aware of the type of claim the author is trying to make is important as a critical reader. The argument is understood through his pathos because of the emotion tied to his imprisonment then later released. As for ethos, the authors used reliable sources in the article to build their argument. Unfortunately for the logos part, the authors used unknown information regarding the supermarket allowing the man to dive through their trash.
The authors quote someone or something when they say, "[r]oughly one third of the food produced in the world for human consumption every year-approximately 1.3 billion tonnes-gets lost or wasted." Throughout the entire essay, when the authors quote something, they always correctly quote it by noting it was by them. It's an illogical argument and the logos has no sufficient amount of reliable evidence; therefore it makes it a fallacy.