Assume that the premise(s) of the following argument are true. apply the other three tests of the worthiness of an argument in their proper order: "anthony was at risk of dying from the severe fall that he took when he was climbing. many who had the same near-fatal experience become averse to climbing afterward. so, anthony will surely become averse to climbing after his fall." that argument is an example of

That argument is an example of a falacy masquerading as a valid inference.

Explanation:

Fallacy means error, deception or falsehood. Usually a fallacy is a misconception that is conveyed as true, misleading others. On the other hand, when an argument conveying a true idea is used to derive a false conclusion from false assumptions, the inference is valid.

Based on this, we can conclude that the argument quoted in the above question is a fallacy disguised as valid inference, because the speaker of the argument provides the information as a true statement, but it is wrong to draw conclusions about how Anthony will react after his accident, based on how other people reacted.

the invasive species was introduced due to commercial purpouses, as there was a demand for fur clothes and hence, a business opportunity connected to this product. actually, it was when the nutrias scaped, causing harm to the us ecosystems when they acquired the status of invasive species. in this case they have caused an environmental problem, but it could have affected also economic interests or even human health.