Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Secundum quid (also called secundum quid et simpliciter, meaning "[what is true] in a certain respect and [what is true] absolutely") is a type of informal fallacy that occurs when the arguer fails to recognize the difference between rules of thumb (soft generalizations, heuristics that hold true as a general rule but leave room for exceptions) and categorical propositions, rules that hold ...
The fallacy of accident (also called destroying the exception or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid) is an informal fallacy where a general rule is applied to an exceptional case. The fallacy of accident gets its name from the fact that one or more accidental features of the specific case make it an exception to the rule.
Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident, jumping to conclusions) – basing a broad conclusion on a small or unrepresentative sample. [55]
Generalizing quickly and sloppily (hasty generalization) (secundum quid) Using an argument's connections to other concepts or people to support or refute it, also called "guilt by association" (association fallacy) Claiming that a lack of proof counts as proof (appeal to ignorance) In humor, errors of reasoning are used for comical purposes.
Secundum quid; When referring to a generalization made from a single example, the terms fallacy of the lonely fact, [8] or the fallacy of proof by example, might be used. [9] When evidence is intentionally excluded to bias the result, the fallacy of exclusion—a form of selection bias—is said to be involved. [10]
Quid pro quo is a common strategy in foreign relations “Quid pro quo just means ‘this for that.’ It’s an exchange, and it is a feature of all commerce. The Latin term only sounds sinister ...
This fallacy is similar to the slippery slope, where the opposition claims that if a restricted action under debate is allowed, such as allowing people with glaucoma to use medical marijuana, then the action will by stages become acceptable in general, such as eventually everyone being allowed to use marijuana. The two arguments imply there is ...
(The Center Square) – Quid pro quo allegations are a key part of the U.S. government’s corruption case against former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and codefendant Michael McClain.