Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The fallacy of division [1] is an informal fallacy that occurs when one reasons that something that is true for a whole must also be true of all or some of its parts. An example: The second grade in Jefferson Elementary eats a lot of ice cream; Carlos is a second-grader in Jefferson Elementary; Therefore, Carlos eats a lot of ice cream
The opposite has also been claimed, for example by Karl Popper, who held that such problems do exist, that they are solvable, and that he had actually found definite solutions to some of them. David Chalmers divides inquiry into philosophical progress in meta-philosophy into three questions.
The concept of a division of a question dates back to at least 1640, when the Lex Parliamentaria noted, "If a Question upon a Debate contains more Parts than one, and Members seem to be for one Part, and not for the other; it may be moved, that the same may be divided into two, or more Questions: as Dec. 2, 1640, the Debate about the Election of two Knights was divided into two Questions."
This page was last edited on 5 February 2023, at 06:15 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.
Diairesis (Ancient Greek: διαίρεσις, romanized: diaíresis, "division") is a form of classification used in ancient (especially Platonic) logic that serves to systematize concepts and come to definitions. When defining a concept using diairesis, one starts with a broad concept, then divides this into two or more specific sub-concepts ...
Scientists thought that Lake Enigma was frozen from top to bottom. Then they discovered that water—and mysterious lifeforms—existed 11 meters below the surface.
The utility of a linguistic framework constitutes issues that Carnap calls 'external' or 'pragmatic'. “To be sure, we have to face at this point an important question; but it is a practical, not a theoretical question; it is the question of whether or not to
One of Daytop’s founders, a Roman Catholic priest named William O’Brien, thought of addicts as needy infants — another sentiment borrowed from Synanon. “You don’t have a drug problem, you have a B-A-B-Y problem,” he explained in Addicts Who Survived: An Oral History of Narcotic Use In America, 1923-1965, published in 1989. “You ...