Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Credulity is a person's willingness or ability to believe that a statement is true, especially on minimal or uncertain evidence. [1] [2] Credulity is not necessarily a belief in something that may be false: the subject of the belief may even be correct, but a credulous person will believe it without good evidence.
The term antonym (and the related antonymy) is commonly taken to be synonymous with opposite, but antonym also has other more restricted meanings. Graded (or gradable) antonyms are word pairs whose meanings are opposite and which lie on a continuous spectrum (hot, cold).
An unpaired word is one that, according to the usual rules of the language, would appear to have a related word but does not. [1] Such words usually have a prefix or suffix that would imply that there is an antonym, with the prefix or suffix being absent or opposite.
In United States law, City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1989) established the basic principle that a governmental actor must provide a strong basis in evidence for its conclusion that remedial action is necessary. The application of this rule has produced conflicting results. [1]
It can either be proved by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance of the evidence. In this respect, affirmative defenses differ from ordinary defenses [claim of right, alibi, infancy, necessity, and self-defense (which is an affirmative defense at common law)], which the prosecution has the burden of disproving beyond a reasonable ...
Ref: Oxford English dictionary: "induction ... 3. Logic the inference of a general law from particular instances." [clarification needed]) The definition given thus applies only when the "conclusion" is general. Two possible definitions of "inference" are: A conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning.
For example, the practical reason of loyalty to one's child may demand the belief that they are innocent while the evidence linking them to the crime may demand a belief in their guilt on the theoretical level. [12] [68] But the two domains also overlap in certain ways. For example, the norm of rationality known as enkrasia links beliefs and ...
For example, the proposition that water is H 2 O (if it is true): According to Kripke, this statement is both necessarily true, because water and H 2 O are the same thing, they are identical in every possible world, and truths of identity are logically necessary; and a posteriori, because it is known only through empirical investigation.