Appeal to emotions

I've noticed in the personal training and fitness industry is that people who want to hire dietitians and personal trainers, do so under pressure. For example, How serious are you about reaching your goals 1 out of 10? If you are serious about making dietary and lifestyle changes, then investing $1,500/month shouldn't be an issue. Since you are unable to afford this amount, it sounds like investing in your health isn't important to you. 

The passage you've provided contains an appeal to emotion, specifically in the form of guilt and pressure, which can be considered a logical fallacy. Let’s break it down:

1. **False Dilemma (Black-and-White Thinking):** The argument presents only two alternatives—either you can afford $1,500 a month and are serious about your health, or you cannot afford it and are not serious. This ignores other possible scenarios, such as someone being serious about their health but unable to afford such a financial commitment due to other responsibilities or financial constraints.

2. **Appeal to Emotion (Guilt):** The statement is designed to make the person feel guilty or pressured if they cannot meet the financial demand. This emotional appeal suggests that monetary investment is the sole indicator of one's commitment to health, which is not necessarily true.

3. **Equivocation:** The argument equates the seriousness of one's commitment to health solely to financial capability. However, being serious about health can be demonstrated in many other ways, such as dedicating time to exercise, seeking affordable alternatives, or making dietary changes independently.

4. **Poor Reasoning/False Cause:** The argument implies a direct causation between the amount of money spent and the level of commitment. While financial investment might influence motivation or access to resources, it doesn't inherently measure one's commitment or sincerity towards their health goals.

5. **Oversimplification:** This argument simplifies the complexities surrounding personal health investment, ignoring factors such as individual financial situations, alternative health strategies, and personal circumstances.

These logical fallacies collectively weaken the initial argument's validity, as they rely on undue emotional pressure rather than rational, evidence-based persuasion.