Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In this example, the fifth "why" suggests a broken shelf foot, which can be immediately replaced to prevent the reoccurrence of the sequence of events that resulted in cross-threading bolts. The nature of the answer to the fifth why in the example is also an important aspect of the five why approach, because solving the immediate problem may ...
The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question. [2] Genetic accounts of an issue may be true and may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits. [3]
An influential collection of texts on logic and reason, the Nyāya Sūtras, attributed to Aksapada Gautama, variously estimated to have been composed between the 6th century BCE and the 2nd century CE, lists in its theory of inference five such reasons used in an argument that was further developed by later logicians.
Creation of an ad-hoc exception to prevent the rule from backfiring against the claim: Example: Everyone has a duty to help the police do their job, no matter who the suspect is. That is why we must support investigations into corruption in the police department. No person is above the law.
Here’s why these cities top the list — and why many younger ... New York City is widely regarded as the most overpriced housing market — and for good reason. ... takes the third spot on the ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Apple misread the room. Long seen as the gold standard in marketing, the tech giant did a face-plant with its ad for the new iPad Pro tablet. The 60-second spot shows a massive hydraulic press ...
Reductio ad absurdum, painting by John Pettie exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1884. In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.