Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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). [14][4][9] It uses an appeal to the beliefs, tastes, or values of a group of people, [12] stating that because a certain opinion or attitude is held by a majority ...
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. [107] Texas sharpshooter fallacy – improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data. [108]
The argument from authority is a logical fallacy, [2] and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible. [3][4] However, in particular circumstances, it is sound to use as a practical although fallible way of obtaining information that can be considered generally likely to be correct if the authority is a real and pertinent intellectual authority ...
Appeal to the law. An appeal to the law ( argumentum ad legem in Latin) is an informal fallacy in which someone tries to encourage or defend an action based on its legality, or condemn it as morally reprehensible, purely because it is illegal. [1] This line of reasoning is faulty because although the law of the land is important, it does not ...
Appeal to consequences, also known as argumentum ad consequentiam (Latin for "argument to the consequence"), is an argument that concludes a hypothesis (typically a belief) to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences. [1] This is based on an appeal to emotion and is a type of informal ...
v. t. e. Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; [ 1 ] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. [ 2 ] Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy, but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need ...
Definition. [edit] Reductio ad Hitlerum is a type of association fallacy. [ 5 ][ 6 ] The argument is that a policy leads to—or is the same as—one advocated or implemented by Adolf Hitler or Nazi Germany and so "proves" that the original policy is undesirable. Another type of reductio ad Hitlerum is asking a question of the form "You know ...
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.