Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In modern philosophy, there are two main types of appeal to emotion. [21] One is the appeal to force (known as ad baculum) the other is the appeal to sympathy, known as ad misericordiam. [21] These are only considered fallacies when used for doxastic systems. [21]
Philosophy of psychology also closely monitors contemporary work conducted in cognitive neuroscience, cognitive psychology, and artificial intelligence, for example questioning whether psychological phenomena can be explained using the methods of neuroscience, evolutionary theory, and computational modeling, respectively.
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) Ecological fallacy – inferring about the nature of an entity based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which that entity belongs.
In law, an argument from inconvenience or argumentum ab inconvenienti, is a valid type of appeal to consequences. Such an argument would seek to show that a proposed action would have unreasonably inconvenient consequences, as for example a law that would require a person wishing to lend money against a security to first ascertain the borrower ...
Karl Popper argued that science and ordinary life do not use induction, and induction is in fact a myth. Instead, knowledge is created by conjecture and criticism. The main role of observations and experiments in science, he argued, is in attempts to criticize and refute existing theories. [13]
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; [1] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. [2]
In the philosophy of mind, logical behaviorism (also known as analytical behaviorism) [1] is the thesis that mental concepts can be explained in terms of behavioral concepts. [ 2 ] Logical behaviorism was first stated by the Vienna Circle , especially Rudolf Carnap . [ 2 ]
What follows is a summary of the causal exclusion problem in its simplest form, and it is merely one of several possible formulations. To the extent that we do not have to go outside human physiology in order to trace the causal antecedents of any bodily movement, intentional action can be fully causally explained by the existence of these physiological antecedents alone.