Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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]
Promulgated by the American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990, [1] Godwin's law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions. [3] He stated that he introduced Godwin's law in 1990 as an experiment in memetics, [1] specifically to address the ubiquity of such comparisons which he believes regrettably trivialize the Holocaust.
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 ]
Tu quoque [a] is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, so that the opponent appears hypocritical.
The fallacy of division is committed if one infers from the sentence in the collective sense that one specific individual is strong enough. [12] [24] The fallacy of composition is committed if one infers from the fact that each member of a group has a property that the group as a whole has this property. [24]
A formal fallacy is contrasted with an informal fallacy which may have a valid logical form and yet be unsound because one or more premises are false. A formal fallacy, however, may have a true premise, but a false conclusion. The term 'logical fallacy' is sometimes used in everyday conversation, and refers to a formal fallacy.
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.
Quoting out of context (sometimes referred to as contextomy or quote mining) is an informal fallacy in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning. [1] Context may be omitted intentionally or accidentally, thinking it to be non-essential.