Matt Maginity

1.
https://youtu.be/7S1SVkysIRw?list=PL35FE5C4B157509C9 (8:16 - 9:19)
Every character, who has a statue that represents them is dead. Link has a statue that represents himself, so that must mean that Link is also dead.

2.
The Statues represent the deceased.
Link has a statue.
Therefore, Link is dead.
or
All A are B
x is A
x is B

3.

4.
The argument is Sound because it is both Valid and True.
As the video implies only character who are dead can have statues that mimic themselves. Link can create a statue that represents himself, which  he can only do if he's also dead.

5.
If there is a statue that represents the character, then they are dead.
Link has a statue.
Therefore, Link is dead.
p → q.

6.
Hypothesis 1: If there isn't a statue of them, then they are not dead.
Hypothesis 2: They are dead.
Conclusion: They have statues that represents themselves.

p: There is a statue of them.
q: They are dead.

Hypothesis 1: ~p → ~q
Hypothesis 2: q
Conclusion: p

The argument is a tautology.

The argument is a tautology, but the example is from a video game. So it makes sense in the context of the game, but it can also make sense in the real world. The video explains that the statues are like funeral effigies. Only those who are dead can have funeral effigies, so it does make sense as a real life example.

True tables seem to be one of the best ways to find out if an argument is a tautology, since they are both easy to do and are accurate if done correctly. As long as the final statements are all true, then the argument is going to be a tautology.

7.
Step 1: The source is from a popular individual on YouTube that does several theories regarding Video Games, Movies and TV show. Though the Movies and TV show theories are on a separate channel, it's the same person. The information is clear and has a lot of research on the topic to back it up. However, the channel does focus on theories, which aren't always true.

Step 2: The video was posted about two years ago. However the  video game  that the video focused on was released all the way back in 2000, 15 years ago. Seeing as how people still do speculate and talk about this theory today and even use this video as a source, it's safe to say that the information is still relevant.  

Step 3: Several fans of the Zelda series support this theory, while others are against it. The theory itself has been speculated almost since the game was released. While I can't say that it's completely accurate and Nintendo themselves (the company that created the Zelda series) has yet to confirm if the theory, the overly complicated Zelda timeline does back this theory up.

Step 4: Since the video and theory are just for fun and aren't about important real-life issues, there is no need for a secret hidden agendas.

Step 5: Since the argument is based around a theory, it isn't supposed to be taken a concrete fact. The topic could just as well be true as it can be false. As a huge fan of the Zelda series, I personally really like this theory, but I can see why other people aren't such a fan. In the end, the theory isn't supposed to have a concrete answer, Zelda fans just enjoy making up crazy theories about a series they love.

8.
The argument may appeal to the limited choice fallacy. There are only three statues for the three transformation masks, plus the fourth for Link, but four is a very limited quantity to make an argument out of. Which means there's a possibly that a statue could be made of a living character some where out there. That's really the only fallacy I found out of the textbook that this argument might appeal to.

9.
Honestly, the experiment didn't really help me think more critically about the argument. However, I think it has more to do with the fact that this argument isn't exactly that legit in the first place and it more of just crazy speculation over an old video game. If I had done this experiment with a much more serious topic, I may have thought more critically about the specific topic.