Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones (meaning the same in Latin) is an informal fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. [1]
Logos (plural: logoi) is logical appeal or the simulation of it, [6]: 38 and the term logic is derived from it. It is normally used to describe facts and figures that support the speaker's claims or thesis. There are also more traditional forms of logical reasoning, such as syllogisms and enthymemes.
For instance, the appeal to poverty is the fallacy of thinking that someone is more likely to be correct because they are poor. [16] When an argument holds that a conclusion is likely to be true precisely because the one who holds or is presenting it lacks authority, it is an "appeal to the common man". [17]
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.
The philosopher Irving Copi defined argumentum ad populum differently from an appeal to popular opinion itself, [19] as an attempt to rouse the "emotions and enthusiasms of the multitude". [19] [20] Douglas N. Walton argues that appeals to popular opinion can be logically valid in some cases, such as in political dialogue within a democracy. [21]
Appeal to the stone is a logical fallacy. Specifically, it is an informal fallacy , which means that it relies on inductive reasoning in an argument to justify an assertion . Informal fallacies contain erroneous reasoning in content of the argument and not the form or structure of it, as opposed to formal fallacies , which contain erroneous ...
Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. The fallacy is committed when one asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has ...
Material fallacies are not logical errors because the conclusion follows from the premises. He then divided the logical group into two groups: purely logical and semi-logical. The semi-logical group included all of Aristotle's sophisms except ignoratio elenchi, petitio principii, and non causa pro causa, which are in the material group. [25]