enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Begging the question - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

    Begging the question is not considered a formal fallacy (an argument that is defective because it uses an incorrect deductive step). Rather, it is a type of informal fallacy that is logically valid but unpersuasive, in that it fails to prove anything other than what is already assumed. [23] [24] [25]

  3. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    Definitional retreat – changing the meaning of a word when an objection is raised. [23] Often paired with moving the goalposts (see below), as when an argument is challenged using a common definition of a term in the argument, and the arguer presents a different definition of the term and thereby demands different evidence to debunk the argument.

  4. Without loss of generality - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Without_loss_of_generality

    For example, if some property P(x,y) of real numbers is known to be symmetric in x and y, namely that P(x,y) is equivalent to P(y,x), then in proving that P(x,y) holds for every x and y, one may assume "without loss of generality" that x ≤ y.

  5. Formal fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy

    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.

  6. List of Latin legal terms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_legal_terms

    A formal statement of fact. / ˌ æ f ɪ ˈ d eɪ v ɪ t / allocatur: it is allowed Generally, a statement from a court that a writ is allowed (i.e. granted); most commonly, a grant of leave to appeal by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, in reference to which the word is used equivalently to certiorari (q.v.) elsewhere. / ˌ æ l l oʊ k eɪ t ...

  7. Proof by contradiction - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_contradiction

    We assume P to be false, i.e., we assume ¬P. It is then shown that ¬P implies falsehood. This is typically accomplished by deriving two mutually contradictory assertions, Q and ¬Q, and appealing to the law of noncontradiction. Since assuming P to be false leads to a contradiction, it is concluded that P is in fact true.

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

    Argumentum ad populum is a type of informal fallacy, [1] [14] specifically a fallacy of relevance, [15] [16] and is similar to an argument from authority (argumentum ad verecundiam).