Questions: Which three statements are true of the values-based position argument genre? Values-based positions can easily lend themselves to bias and logical fallacies. When using a values-based position, writers must avoid an overly emotional tone and relying too much on emotional (pathos) arguments. Values-based positions typically include a discussion of the main cause of a problem. Values-based positions rely on the writer to appeal to a common value with the audience.

The answer is:

1. Values-based positions can easily lend themselves to bias and logical fallacies.
2. When using a values-based position, writers must avoid an overly emotional tone and relying too much on emotional (pathos) arguments.
3. Values-based positions rely on the writer to appeal to a common value with the audience.

This statement is true. Values-based arguments often stem from deeply held beliefs and personal values, which can sometimes lead to biased reasoning and logical fallacies. For example, a writer might commit a "hasty generalization" fallacy by making broad claims based on limited evidence that aligns with their values.

This statement is true. While emotional appeals (pathos) can be powerful, over-reliance on them can undermine the credibility of the argument. Writers need to balance emotional appeals with logical reasoning (logos) and ethical appeals (ethos) to create a well-rounded argument.

This statement is not necessarily true. While discussing the main cause of a problem can be part of a values-based argument, it is not a defining characteristic. Values-based arguments focus more on aligning the argument with the audience's values rather than on causality.

This statement is true. A key aspect of values-based arguments is the appeal to shared values between the writer and the audience. This common ground helps to persuade the audience by connecting the argument to their own beliefs and values.