Question

Finally, the fallacy of the irrelevant conclusion tries to establish the truth of a proposition by offering an argument that actually provides support for an entirely different conclusion. All children should have ample attention from their parents. Parents who work full-time cannot give ample attention to their children. Therefore , mothers should not work full-time.

Why is the particular argument irrelevant? Why would someone make such an argument? If you were presented with this argument, how would you respond? Is the argument salvageable (can it be modified to make it more reasonable)?

Answer 1

The argument presented here is not relevant. Ample attention does not mean full-time attention. It means that the child should get attention when he/she needs attention. This arguments will lead to a conclusion that working mothers don't give ample attention than when compared to full-time mothers. The quality of the time spent for the children matters. Attention from both father and mother is important. Working and having a job is considered as a choice for women and priority for men. The demands of a child for attention will vary as they grow up. The mother need not be there all the time for the child. That doesnt mean that a mother should be absent when the child needs her too. Parenting is a very demanding task. The parents should keep up a balance between providing them ample attention and making them self-reliant and independent enough to do certain tasks on their own.