Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred
Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney.
The question before us is, whether the class of persons
described in the plea in abatement compose a portion
of this people, and are constituent members of this
sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are
not included, and were not intended to be included,
under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can
therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which
that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of
the United States. On the contrary, they were at that
time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of
beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant
race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained
subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges
but such as those who held the power and the
Government might choose to grant them.
What type of logical error underlies the argument that
Black people were inferior?
genetic fallacy
begging the claim
hasty generalization
ad populum

The passage from Dred Scott v. Sandford reflects a genetic fallacy because it bases the argument on the origins or history of Black people, rather than on their current status, rights, or abilities as individuals. The argument suggests that because Black people were historically considered inferior, so they should continue to be considered inferior and denied rights under the Constitution. This fallacy overlooks the potential for individuals to change or for society's views to evolve over time, and it unfairly dismisses the possibility of equal rights based on inherent human dignity rather than historical status.

The genetic fallacy assumes an idea must be true or false based solely on its origins.