Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The map–territory relation is the relationship between an object and a representation of that object, as in the relation between a geographical territory and a map of it. Mistaking the map for the territory is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone confuses the semantics of a term with what it represents.
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; Sophistical Refutations – Text by Aristotle on logical fallacies, in which Aristotle presented thirteen fallacies
The legal rule itself – how to apply this exception – is complicated, as it is often dependent on who said the statement and which actor it was directed towards. [6] The analysis is thus different if the government or a public figure is the target of the false statement (where the speech may get more protection) than a private individual who is being attacked over a matter of their private ...
Argument map – Visual representation of the structure of an argument; Argumentation theory – Academic field of logic and rhetoric; Cognitive bias – Systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment; Critical thinking – Analysis of facts to form a judgment; False statement – Statement contradicted by facts and reality
A false statement, also known as a falsehood, falsity, misstatement or untruth, is a statement that is false or does not align with reality. This concept spans various fields, including communication, law, linguistics, and philosophy. It is considered a fundamental issue in human discourse.
Hume's law or Hume's guillotine [1] is the thesis that an ethical or judgmental conclusion cannot be inferred from purely descriptive factual statements. [ 2 ] A similar view is defended by G. E. Moore 's open-question argument , intended to refute any identification of moral properties with natural properties , which is asserted by ethical ...
An argument map or argument diagram is a visual representation of the structure of an argument. An argument map typically includes all the key components of the argument, traditionally called the conclusion and the premises , also called contention and reasons . [ 1 ]
The fact–value distinction is also closely related to the moralistic fallacy, an invalid inference of factual conclusions from purely evaluative premises. For example, an invalid inference "Because everybody ought to be equal, there are no innate genetic differences between people" is an instance of the moralistic fallacy.