Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
List of paradoxes. Outline of public relations – Overview of and topical guide to public relations. Map–territory relation – Relationship between an object and a representation of that object (confusing map with territory, menu with meal) Mathematical fallacy – Certain type of mistaken proof.
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.
The following are forms of egocentric bias: Bias blind spot, the tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to identify more cognitive biases in others than in oneself. [35] False consensus effect, the tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them.
Formal fallacy. In logic and philosophy, a formal fallacy[a] is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure that can neatly be expressed in a standard logic system, for example propositional logic. [2] It is defined as a deductive argument that is invalid. The argument itself could have true premises, but still ...
Informal fallacies are a form of incorrect argument in natural language. [ 4 ] An argument is a series of propositions, called the premises, together with one more proposition, called the conclusion. [ 5 ][ 1 ] The premises in correct arguments offer either deductive or defeasible support for the conclusion.
A faulty generalization is an informal fallacy wherein a conclusion is drawn about all or many instances of a phenomenon on the basis of one or a few instances of that phenomenon. It is similar to a proof by example in mathematics. [1] It is an example of jumping to conclusions. [2] For example, one may generalize about all people or all ...
The term naturalistic fallacy is sometimes used to label the problematic inference of an ought from an is (the is–ought problem). [3] Michael Ridge relevantly elaborates that "[t]he intuitive idea is that evaluative conclusions require at least one evaluative premise—purely factual premises about the naturalistic features of things do not entail or even support evaluative conclusions."
Fallacies of definition are the various ways in which definitions can fail to explain terms. The phrase is used to suggest an analogy with an informal fallacy. [1] Definitions may fail to have merit, because they are overly broad, [2] [3] [4] overly narrow, [3] [4] or incomprehensible; [4] or they use obscure or ambiguous language, [2] contain mutually exclusive parts, [3] or (perhaps most ...