enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    Definitional retreat – changing the meaning of a word when an objection is raised. [23] Often paired with moving the goalposts (see below), as when an argument is challenged using a common definition of a term in the argument, and the arguer presents a different definition of the term and thereby demands different evidence to debunk the argument.

  3. Fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

    Whately divided fallacies into two groups: logical and material. According to Whately, logical fallacies are arguments where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Material fallacies are not logical errors because the conclusion follows from the premises. He then divided the logical group into two groups: purely logical and semi-logical.

  4. Formal fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy

    Logical fallacy: Since most of the green is touching red, and most of the red is touching blue, most of the green must be touching blue. This, however, is a false statement. In the strictest sense, a logical fallacy is the incorrect application of a valid logical principle or an application of a nonexistent principle: Most Rimnars are Jornars.

  5. Fallacies of definition - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacies_of_definition

    Fallacies of definition are the various ways in which definitions can fail to explain terms. The phrase is used to suggest an analogy with an informal fallacy. [1] Definitions may fail to have merit, because they are overly broad, [2] [3] [4] overly narrow, [3] [4] or incomprehensible; [4] or they use obscure or ambiguous language, [2] contain mutually exclusive parts, [3] or (perhaps most ...

  6. Association fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

    The association fallacy is a formal fallacy that asserts that properties of one thing must also be properties of another thing if both things belong to the same group. For example, a fallacious arguer may claim that "bears are animals, and bears are dangerous; therefore your dog, which is also an animal, must be dangerous."

  7. False equivalence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

    In an even more fallacious version, d is not required to exist in both sets; merely a similarity of two items d 1 in set A and d 2 in set B is cited to assert equivalence among the sets. [3] Example: If apples and oranges are both fruits, and there are seeds in both apples and oranges, then since they both contain seeds, apples and oranges are ...

  8. Conjunction fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunction_fallacy

    In some experimental demonstrations, the conjoint option is evaluated separately from its basic option. In other words, one group of participants is asked to rank-order the likelihood that Linda is a bank teller, a high school teacher, and several other options, and another group is asked to rank-order whether Linda is a bank teller and active in the feminist movement versus the same set of ...

  9. Logical truth - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_truth

    Logical constants determine whether a statement is a logical truth when they are combined with a language that limits its meaning. Therefore, until it is determined how to make a distinction between all logical constants regardless of their language, it is impossible to know the complete truth of a statement or argument. [2]