Which appeal is made when dismissing the notion that organic produce is healthier?

The appeal made when dismissing the notion that organic produce is healthier is an Appeal to Ridicule. This type of argument undermines a claim by mocking it or presenting it in a way that makes it seem absurd or ridiculous. By using humor or derision, this appeal distracts from the actual merits of the argument and instead focuses on discrediting it through scorn.

In the context of organic produce, this might involve pointing out perceived flaws or absurdities associated with the claims of health benefits, thus undermining the assertion without addressing the scientific evidence or data directly. This tactic is effective in swaying public opinion by invoking laughter or disbelief rather than engaging in a rational discussion about the health implications of organic versus non-organic foods.

Other types of appeals, like emotional appeals, tradition, or ignorance, do not specifically leverage mockery or derision as a way to dismiss the argument. For instance, an emotional appeal would focus on evoking feelings rather than making light of a position, whereas an appeal to tradition emphasizes the value of longstanding practices instead of ridiculing newer ideas. An appeal to ignorance would presume that a lack of evidence for one side validates the other side, which doesn't align with the dismissive and mocking tone inherent in