enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. List of valid argument forms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_valid_argument_forms

    Then it states that if the first one happens, there will be a particular outcome and if the second happens, there will be a separate outcome. The conclusion is that either the first outcome or the second outcome will happen. The criticism with this form is that it does not give a definitive conclusion; just a statement of possibilities. [3]

  3. Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_conclusion...

    Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative) is a formal fallacy that is committed when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion and one or two negative premises. For example: No fish are dogs, and no dogs can fly, therefore all fish can fly.

  4. Affirming the consequent - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

    In propositional logic, affirming the consequent (also known as converse error, fallacy of the converse, or confusion of necessity and sufficiency) is a formal fallacy (or an invalid form of argument) that is committed when, in the context of an indicative conditional statement, it is stated that because the consequent is true, therefore the ...

  5. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_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).

  6. Negative conclusion from affirmative premises - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_conclusion_from...

    Negative conclusion from affirmative premises is a syllogistic fallacy committed when a categorical syllogism has a negative conclusion yet both premises are affirmative. The inability of affirmative premises to reach a negative conclusion is usually cited as one of the basic rules of constructing a valid categorical syllogism .

  7. Van Gogh fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Gogh_fallacy

    The Van Gogh Fallacy is an example of a logical fallacy. It is a type of fallacy wherein the conclusion is affirmed by its consequent (fallacy of affirming the consequent) instead of its antecedent (modus ponens). [1] [2] Its name is derived from a particular case that argues:

  8. Circular reasoning - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

    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] Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy, but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or ...

  9. Template:Fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Fallacies

    A navigational box that can be placed at the bottom of articles. Template parameters [Edit template data] Parameter Description Type Status State state The initial visibility of the navbox Suggested values collapsed expanded autocollapse String suggested Template transclusions Transclusion maintenance Check completeness of transclusions The above documentation is transcluded from Template ...