Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The wax argument or the sheet of wax example is a thought experiment that René Descartes created in the second of his Meditations on First Philosophy. He devised it to analyze what properties are essential for bodies, show how uncertain our knowledge of the world is compared to our knowledge of our minds, and argue for rationalism. [1] [2]
Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that a compromise between two positions is always correct. [ 16 ] Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy, decision-point fallacy) – improperly ...
Arguments from example may be difficult to recognize because they can look like mere illustration. [2] For example: Taxonomists use Latin words to classify various animals into such categories as kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species.
A priori ('from the earlier') and a posteriori ('from the later') are Latin phrases used in philosophy to distinguish types of knowledge, justification, or argument by their reliance on experience. A priori knowledge is independent from any experience. Examples include mathematics, [i] tautologies and deduction from pure reason.
[5] [6] One central aspect is that this support is not restricted to a specific reasoner but that any rational person would find the conclusion convincing based on the premises. [6] [1] This way, logical reasoning plays a role in expanding knowledge. [7] The main discipline studying logical reasoning is called logic.
For example, if A. Plato was mortal, and B. Socrates was like Plato in other respects, then asserting that C. Socrates was mortal is an example of argument by analogy because the reasoning employed in it proceeds from a particular truth in a premise (Plato was mortal) to a similar particular truth in the conclusion, namely that Socrates was mortal.
Historically, begging the question refers to a fault in a dialectical argument in which the speaker assumes some premise that has not been demonstrated to be true. In modern usage, it has come to refer to an argument in which the premises assume the conclusion without supporting it. This makes it an example of circular reasoning. [1] [2]
Ball of wax example → Wax argument – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Greg Bard ( talk ) 20:40, 6 January 2014 (UTC) [ reply ] I think this article should be moved under the name "Wax Argument" instead of "ball of wax example" as "Wax Argument" provides more information with less words and can be consider the correct ...