Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Special pleading. Special pleading is an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception. [1][2][3][4][5] It is the application of a double standard. [6][7] In the classic distinction among material fallacies, cognitive fallacies, and formal fallacies ...
Mind projection fallacy – assuming that a statement about an object describes an inherent property of the object, rather than a personal perception. Moralistic fallacy – inferring factual conclusions from evaluative premises in violation of fact–value distinction (e.g.: inferring is from ought).
A loaded question is a form of complex question that contains a controversial assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt). [ 1 ] Such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda. [ 2 ] The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your ...
The argument from authority is a logical fallacy, [2] and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible. [3][4] However, in particular circumstances, it is sound to use as a practical although fallible way of obtaining information that can be considered generally likely to be correct if the authority is a real and pertinent intellectual authority ...
The description of the fallacy in this form is attributed to British philosopher Antony Flew, who wrote, in his 1966 book God & Philosophy, . In this ungracious move a brash generalization, such as No Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge, when faced with falsifying facts, is transformed while you wait into an impotent tautology: if ostensible Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge, then this is ...
Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones (meaning the same in Latin) is an informal fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. [ 1 ] This kind of appeal to emotion is irrelevant to or distracting from the facts of the argument (a so-called ...
Appeal to consequences, also known as argumentum ad consequentiam (Latin for "argument to the consequence"), is an argument that concludes a hypothesis (typically a belief) to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences. [1] This is based on an appeal to emotion and is a type of informal ...
Apples and oranges are both similar-sized seeded fruits that grow on trees, but that does not make the two interchangeable. A false equivalence or false equivalency is an informal fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. [1]