Which of the following is an example of a fallacy of vacuity?

A fallacy of vacuity occurs when an argument fails to provide substantial evidence or reasoning and relies instead on statements that don't logically connect or support the conclusion.

In the context of the options provided, a non sequitur is a clear example of this fallacy. It represents a situation where the conclusion drawn does not logically follow from the premises presented. For instance, if someone argues that because it’s raining outside, they must be hungry, this leap in reasoning lacks a clear, logical connection. Therefore, the conclusion does not follow from the premises, demonstrating vacuity in the argument.

The other options, while they represent various types of logical fallacies, do not specifically pertain to the concept of vacuity. Ad hominem attacks the character of a person rather than addressing the argument itself. Ad populum appeals to the emotions or prejudices of an audience rather than logical reasoning. Ambiguity arises from unclear language or phrasing, which can lead to misunderstandings but does not necessarily indicate an absence of logical connection in the argument itself.