Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The opposite, slothful induction, is the fallacy of denying the logical conclusion of an inductive argument, dismissing an effect as "just a coincidence" when it is very likely not. The overwhelming exception is related to the hasty generalization but works from the other end. It is a generalization that is accurate, but tags on a qualification ...
Wishful thinking – arguing for a course of action by the listener according to what might be pleasing to imagine rather than according to evidence or reason. [86] Appeal to nature – judgment is based solely on whether the subject of judgment is 'natural' or 'unnatural'. [87] (Sometimes also called the "naturalistic fallacy", but is not to ...
The burden of production is a minimal burden to produce at least enough evidence for the trier of fact to consider a disputed claim. [ 27 ] : 16–17 After litigants have met the burden of production and their claim is being considered by a trier of fact, they have the burden of persuasion, that enough evidence has been presented to persuade ...
Argument from silence – Argument based on the absence of statements in historical documents, rather than their presence; Hitchens's razor – General rule rejecting claims made without evidence; List of fallacies; Martha Mitchell effect – Labelling real experiences as delusional; Occam's razor – Philosophical problem-solving principle
Escalation of commitment, irrational escalation, or sunk cost fallacy, where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong. G. I. Joe fallacy, the tendency to think that knowing about cognitive bias is enough to overcome it. [65]
Inductive reasoning is any of various methods of reasoning in which broad generalizations or principles are derived from a body of observations. [1] [2] This article is concerned with the inductive reasoning other than deductive reasoning (such as mathematical induction), where the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain given the premises are correct; in contrast, the truth of the ...
In carefully designed scientific experiments, null results can be interpreted as evidence of absence. [7] Whether the scientific community will accept a null result as evidence of absence depends on many factors, including the detection power of the applied methods, the confidence of the inference, as well as confirmation bias within the community.
For example, in their 2019 article Evidence based medicine as science, Vere and Gibson wrote "[falsifiability has] been considered problematic because theories are not simply tested through falsification but in conjunction with auxiliary assumptions and background knowledge." [23]