- Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:06 pm
You are correct that it is sort of similar to a Source Argument (also known as an ad hominem argument). In a true Source Argument, however, the author attacks someone else's argument based on their actions of intentions. For example" "This tech CEO says that his app will help the world but he must be wrong because he only created this app to help himself." The tech CEO's motivations are irrelevant in determining whether or not his argument (that his app will help the world) is valid.
The argument presented here is slightly different, however, because the author is not attacking an argument that someone else is making. Instead, it's saying that if something was created with the purpose of personal gain, it cannot then serve the interests of others.
Many flaws that you will encounter on the test cannot be neatly categorized but they all boil down to the idea that the premises as stated do not fully prove the conclusion as stated. So if you can identify why the premises do not equal the conclusion, that's all you need to do to identify the flaw!
Hope this helps!