Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Fallacy of accent – changing the meaning of a statement by not specifying on which word emphasis falls. Persuasive definition – purporting to use the "true" or "commonly accepted" meaning of a term while, in reality, using an uncommon or altered definition. (cf. the if-by-whiskey fallacy)
Logical fallacy: A misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning in argumentation. Paradox gun : A gun that has characteristics of both (smoothbore) shotguns and rifles. Paradoxical laughter : Inappropriate laughter, often recognized as such by the laughing person.
An example of a language dependent fallacy is given as a debate as to who in humanity are learners: the wise or the ignorant. [18]: 3 A language-independent fallacy is, for example: "Coriscus is different from Socrates." "Socrates is a man." "Therefore, Coriscus is different from a man." [18]: 4
Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments [1] is a textbook on logical fallacies by T. Edward Damer that has been used for many years in a number of college courses on logic, critical thinking, argumentation, and philosophy. It explains 60 of the most commonly committed fallacies.
This explains, for example, why arguments that are accidentally valid are still somehow flawed: because the arguer himself lacks a good reason to believe the conclusion. [9] The fallacy of begging the question, on this perspective, is a fallacy because it fails to expand our knowledge by providing independent justification for its conclusion ...
By invoking the fallacy, the contested issue of lying is ignored (cf. whataboutism). The tu quoque fallacy is a specific type of "two wrongs make a right". Accusing another of not practicing what they preach , while appropriate in some situations, [ a ] does not in itself invalidate an action or statement that is perceived as contradictory.
The descriptive fallacy refers to reasoning which treats a speech act as a logical proposition, which would be mistaken when the meaning of the statement is not based on its truth condition. [1] It was suggested by the British philosopher of language J. L. Austin in 1955 in the lectures now known as How to Do Things With Words.
The fallacy does not take into account whether the arguments do or do not really support the substituted issue, it only calls attention to the fact that they do not constitute proof of the original one… It is a particularly prevalent and subtle fallacy and it assumes a great variety of forms.