Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Syntactic ambiguity, also known as structural ambiguity, [1] amphiboly, or amphibology, is characterized by the potential for a sentence to yield multiple interpretations due to its ambiguous syntax. This form of ambiguity is not derived from the varied meanings of individual words but rather from the relationships among words and clauses ...
Traditionally, a great number of informal fallacies have been identified, including the fallacy of equivocation, the fallacy of amphiboly, the fallacies of composition and division, the false dilemma, the fallacy of begging the question, the ad hominem fallacy and the appeal to ignorance. There is no general agreement as to how the various ...
Logical Fallacies, Literacy Education Online; Informal Fallacies, Texas State University page on informal fallacies; Stephen's Guide to the Logical Fallacies (mirror) Visualization: Rhetological Fallacies, Information is Beautiful; Master List of Logical Fallacies, University of Texas at El Paso; Fallacies, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
An example of a language dependent fallacy is given as a debate as to who in humanity are learners: the wise or the ignorant. [18]: 3 A language-independent fallacy is, for example: "Coriscus is different from Socrates." "Socrates is a man." "Therefore, Coriscus is different from a man." [18]: 4
The logical fallacies of amphiboly and equivocation rely heavily on the use of ambiguous words and phrases. In continental philosophy (particularly phenomenology and existentialism), there is much greater tolerance of ambiguity, as it is generally seen as an integral part of the human condition.
This page was last edited on 22 March 2021, at 05:15 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may ...
4. Certain Sushi Rolls. Pay attention to the descriptions when you read the menu at your favorite sushi joint, guys.One Redditor explained that the only difference between her restaurant's $3.75 ...
Equivocation in a syllogism (a chain of reasoning) produces a fallacy of four terms (quaternio terminorum). Below is an example: Since only man [human] is rational. And no woman is a man [male]. Therefore, no woman is rational. [1] The first instance of "man" implies the entire human species, while the second implies just those who are male.