Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Poetic justice describes an obligation of the dramatic poet, along with philosophers and priests, to see that their work promotes moral behavior. [10] 18th-century French dramatic style honored that obligation with the use of hamartia as a vice to be punished [10] [11] Phèdre, Racine's adaptation of Euripides' Hippolytus, is an example of French Neoclassical use of hamartia as a means of ...
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.
Yet, if Speaker B believes the maxim "it is acceptable to break the law to wrong those who also break the law", they are committing no logical fallacy. From the conversation above, it is impossible to know which Speaker B believes. This fallacy is often used as a red herring, or an attempt to change or distract from the issue. For example:
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 logic and philosophy, a formal fallacy [a] is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure. Propositional logic, [2] for example, is concerned with the meanings of sentences and the relationships between them. It focuses on the role of logical operators, called propositional connectives, in determining whether a ...
Perfect is the enemy of good is an aphorism that means insistence on perfection often prevents implementation of good improvements. Achieving absolute perfection may be impossible; one should not let the struggle for perfection stand in the way of appreciating or executing on something that is imperfect but still of value.
No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informal fallacy in which one modifies a prior claim in response to a counterexample by asserting the counterexample is excluded by definition.
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]