Reading the below conversation between Nick and Joey. Then, answer the following questions (2 paragraphs each):

1. This conversation includes a red herring fallacy. Where does the fallacy occur, and why is it a red herring? Be sure to define the fallacy, and discuss how it is fallacious within the context.

2. At the end of the conversation, Nick says, "I proved that you’re wrong, and if you’re wrong, I’m right." Is this a true statement? Does proving that someone else is wrong about something mean that you are right about that same something? Explain your answer (this statement also includes a sneaky fallacy; identify/explain it for +1 EC to your overall score).

Joey: So, what happens when you’re wrong?

Nick: Well, Joey, I’m never wrong.

Joey: But you can’t always be right.

Nick: Well, if it’s your job to be right, then you’re never wrong.

Joey: But what if you are wrong?

Nick: Okay, let’s say that you’re defending chocolate and I’m defending vanilla. Now, if I were to say to you, “Vanilla’s the best flavor ice cream”, you’d say …?

Joey: “No, chocolate is.”

Nick: Exactly. But you can’t win that argument. So, I’ll ask you: So you think chocolate is the end-all and be-all of ice cream, do you?

Joey: It’s the best ice cream; I wouldn’t order any other.

Nick: Oh. So it’s all chocolate for you, is it?

Joey: Yes, chocolate is all I need.

Nick: Well, I need more than chocolate. And for that matter, I need more than vanilla. I believe that we need freedom and choice when it comes to our ice cream, and that, Joey Naylor, that is the definition of liberty.

Joey: But that’s not what we’re talking about.

Nick: Ah, but that’s what I’m talking about.

Joey: But … you didn’t prove that vanilla’s the best.

Nick: I didn’t have to. I proved that you’re wrong, and if you’re wrong, I’m right