Question1:
[premise]: The truth about human knowledge is from skepticism.
[conclusion]: There is no way that we can know truth from the view of skepticism.
[attack]: I think that this fallacy is Incompatible Premise. Because no acceptable conclusion can be drawn and the arguer cannot have a both ways. You can’t say that the truth can be gained from skepticism and the truth can’t be gained from skepticism at the same time.
Question2:
[premise1]: Each individual needs to determine what is right by himself.
[premise2]: I don’t see anything unethical about using marijuana.
[conclusion]: Your view that I’m wrong to use marijuana is just wrong.
[attack]: I think that this fallacy is Contraction between premise and conclusion. Because the premise says that people determine the thing right or wrong by themself and the conclusion says that people determine by other people.
