Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones (meaning the same in Latin) is an informal fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. [1]
Naturalistic fallacy fallacy is a type of argument from fallacy. Straw man fallacy – refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. [110] Texas sharpshooter fallacy – improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data. [111]
Even non-deductive arguments can be said to be fallacious: for example, an inductive argument that incorrectly applies principles of probability or causality. But "since deductive arguments depend on formal properties and inductive arguments don't, formal fallacies apply only to deductive arguments". [5]
An appeal to pity (also called argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, or the Galileo argument) [1] [2] is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting one's opponent's feelings of pity or guilt.
G. I. Joe fallacy, the tendency to think that knowing about cognitive bias is enough to overcome it. [65] Gambler's fallacy, the tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by past events, when in reality they are unchanged. The fallacy arises from an erroneous conceptualization of the law of large numbers. For example, "I've ...
Appeal to flattery [1] is a fallacy in which a person uses flattery, excessive compliments, in an attempt to appeal to their audience's vanity to win support for their side. [2] It is also known as apple polishing , wheel greasing , brown nosing , appeal to pride , appeal to vanity or argumentum ad superbiam . [ 3 ]
For example, saying, 'I hear what you’re asking, and I want to give you an answer right now. ... and avoid getting drawn into emotional arguments or justifications," Dr. McGeehan says ...
This fallacy has the following argument form: Either P or Q is true. Q is frightening. Therefore, P is true. The argument is invalid. The appeal to emotion is used in exploiting existing fears to create support for the speaker's proposal, namely P. Also, often the false dilemma fallacy is involved, suggesting Q is the proposed idea's sole ...