Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow") is a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument that renders the argument invalid. The flaw can be expressed in the standard system of logic. [1] Such an argument is always considered to be wrong.
Deductive reasoning is the psychological process of drawing deductive inferences.An inference is a set of premises together with a conclusion. This psychological process starts from the premises and reasons to a conclusion based on and supported by these premises.
Naturalistic fallacy fallacy is a type of argument from fallacy. Straw man fallacy – refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. [110] Texas sharpshooter fallacy – improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data. [111]
It is defined as a deductive argument that is invalid. The argument itself could have true premises, but still have a false conclusion. [3] Thus, a formal fallacy is a fallacy in which deduction goes wrong, and is no longer a logical process. This may not affect the truth of the conclusion, since validity and truth are separate in formal logic.
Forms of logical reasoning can be distinguished based on how the premises support the conclusion. Deductive arguments offer the strongest possible support. Non-deductive arguments are weaker but are nonetheless correct forms of reasoning. [28] [29] The term "proof" is often used for deductive arguments or very strong non-deductive arguments. [30]
A fallacy in argumentation that targets the person making an argument rather than the argument itself. ad ignorantium A logical fallacy where a proposition is considered true because it has not been proven false or vice versa. ad infinitum An argument or process that is supposed to continue indefinitely, without ever reaching an end or conclusion.
The reasoning in a deduction is by definition cogent. Such reasoning itself, or the chain of intermediates representing it, has also been called an argument, more fully a deductive argument . In many cases, an argument can be known to be valid by means of a deduction of its conclusion from its premises but non-deductive methods such as Venn ...
A syllogism (Ancient Greek: συλλογισμός, syllogismos, 'conclusion, inference') is a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on two propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true.