Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Argument from incredulity – when someone can't imagine something to be true, and therefore deems it false, or conversely, holds that it must be true because they can't see how it could be false. [15] Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that a compromise between ...
However, the logical validity of an argument is a function of its internal consistency, not the truth value of its premises. For example, consider this syllogism, which involves a false premise: If the streets are wet, it has rained recently. (premise) The streets are wet. (premise) Therefore it has rained recently. (conclusion)
Slippery slope arguments may be defeated by asking critical questions or giving counterarguments. [32] There are several reasons for a slippery slope to be fallacious: for example, the argument is going too far into the future, it is a too complex argument whose structure is hard to identify, or the argument makes emotional appeals. [33]
The premises in non-deductive arguments offer a certain degree of support for their conclusion but they are defeasible: [5] [12] it is possible for all the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. Defeasible arguments may still be rationally compelling despite being fallible, so they do not automatically constitute fallacies. [13]
The second premise is an assertion that P, the antecedent of the conditional claim, is the case. From these two premises it can be logically concluded that Q, the consequent of the conditional claim, must be the case as well. An example of an argument that fits the form modus ponens: If today is Tuesday, then John will go to work. Today is Tuesday.
A false dilemma is an informal fallacy based on a premise that erroneously limits what options are available. [1] [2] [3] In its most simple form, called the fallacy of bifurcation, all but two alternatives are excluded. A fallacy is an argument, i.e. a series of premises together with a conclusion, that is unsound, i.e. not
Business ethics operates on the premise, for example, that the ethical operation of a private business is possible—those who dispute that premise, such as libertarian socialists (who contend that "business ethics" is an oxymoron) do so by definition outside of the domain of business ethics proper. [citation needed]
Deductive reasoning offers the strongest support: the premises ensure the conclusion, meaning that it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if all the premises are true. Such an argument is called a valid argument, for example: all men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore, Socrates is mortal. For valid arguments, it is not important ...