Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A faulty generalization is an informal fallacy wherein a conclusion is drawn about all or many instances of a phenomenon on the basis of one or a few instances of that phenomenon. It is similar to a proof by example in mathematics. [1] It is an example of jumping to conclusions. [2] For example, one may generalize about all people or all ...
An anecdotal evidence (or anecdata[ 1 ]) is a piece of evidence based on descriptions or reports of individual or personal experiences or observations, [ 2 ][ 3 ] collected in a non- systematic manner. [ 4 ] The word anecdotal constitutes a variety of forms of evidence. This word can mean things one personally witnessed, claims made by oneself ...
Generalizing quickly and sloppily (hasty generalization) (secundum quid) Using an argument's connections to other concepts or people to support or refute it, also called "guilt by association" (association fallacy) Claiming that a lack of proof counts as proof (appeal to ignorance) In humor, errors of reasoning are used for comical purposes.
List of paradoxes. Outline of public relations – Overview of and topical guide to public relations. 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.
Informal fallacies are a form of incorrect argument in natural language. [ 4 ] An argument is a series of propositions, called the premises, together with one more proposition, called the conclusion. [ 5 ][ 1 ] The premises in correct arguments offer either deductive or defeasible support for the conclusion.
The fallacy of accident gets its name from the fact that one or more accidental features of the specific case make it an exception to the rule. [1][2] A generalization that is largely true may not apply in a specific case (or to some subcategory of cases) for good reasons. It is one of the thirteen fallacies originally identified by Aristotle ...
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. [ 1 ] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man". The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having ...
Secundum quid (also called secundum quid et simpliciter, meaning "[what is true] in a certain respect and [what is true] absolutely") is a type of informal fallacy that occurs when the arguer fails to recognize the difference between rules of thumb (soft generalizations, heuristics that hold true as a general rule but leave room for exceptions) and categorical propositions, rules that hold ...