Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In reasoning and argument mapping, a counterargument is an objection to an objection. A counterargument can be used to rebut an objection to a premise , a main contention or a lemma . Synonyms of counterargument may include rebuttal, reply, counterstatement, counterreason, comeback and response.
For example, in a study by Meyers-Levy and Maheswaran, subjects were more likely to counterfactual think alternative circumstances for a target person if their house burned down three days after they forgot to renew their insurance versus six months after they forgot to renew their insurance.
For example, the fact that "student John Smith is not lazy" is a counterexample to the generalization "students are lazy", and both a counterexample to, and disproof of, the universal quantification "all students are lazy." [2]
Invalid argument. This can be more easily seen by giving a counter-example with the same argument form: Some people are herbivores. Some herbivores are zebras. Therefore, some people are zebras. Invalid argument, as it is possible that the premises be true and the conclusion false.
For example, one's opponent's action appears as forbidden torture, one's own actions as "enhanced interrogation methods", the other's violence as aggression, one's own merely as a reaction. Christensen even sees utility in the use of the argument: "The so-called 'whataboutists' question what has not been questioned before and bring ...
Counterpropaganda and propaganda share a symbiotic relationship. Counterpropaganda is employed in situations to counter existing propaganda efforts and thus to understand the former requires a clear understanding of the latter. Practitioners and academics alike have advanced multiple definitions of propaganda.
Criticisms and counter examples (notably the Grandma case) prompted a revision, which resulted in the alteration of (3) and (4) to limit themselves to the same method (i.e. vision): p is true; S believes that p; if p were true, S (using M) would believe that p; if p weren't true, S (using method M) wouldn't believe that p
Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident, jumping to conclusions) – basing a broad conclusion on a small or unrepresentative sample. [55] Argument from anecdote – a fallacy where anecdotal evidence is presented as ...