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

    A fallacy of induction happens when a conclusion is drawn from premises that only lightly support it. Misleading vividness – involves describing an occurrence in vivid detail, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, to convince someone that it is more important; this also relies on the appeal to emotion fallacy.

  3. Tu quoque - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

    Tu quoque [a] is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, so that the opponent appears hypocritical.

  4. Special pleading - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading

    Special pleading also often resembles the "appeal to" logical fallacies. [8] [9] In medieval philosophy, it was not presumed that wherever a distinction is claimed, a relevant basis for the distinction should exist and be substantiated. Special pleading subverts a presumption of existential import. [citation needed] [further explanation needed]

  5. Fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

    A naturalistic fallacy can occur, for example, in the case of sheer quantity metrics based on the premise "more is better" [43] or, in the case of developmental assessment in the field of psychology, "higher is better". [46] A false analogy occurs when claims are supported by unsound comparisons between data points.

  6. Argument from incredulity - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

    Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy, [1] is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine. Arguments from incredulity can take the form:

  7. Association fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

    The association fallacy is a formal logical 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."

  8. List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

    List-length effect: A smaller percentage of items are remembered in a longer list, but as the length of the list increases, the absolute number of items remembered increases as well. [163] Memory inhibition: Being shown some items from a list makes it harder to retrieve the other items (e.g., Slamecka, 1968). Misinformation effect

  9. Psychologist's fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychologist's_fallacy

    For example, Psychologist's fallacy, the fallacy, to which the psychologist is peculiarly liable, of reading into the mind he is examining what is true of his own; especially of reading into lower minds what is true of higher. [2] A danger to be avoided known as the 'psychologist's fallacy'.