Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The lexical ambiguity of a word or phrase applies to it having more than one meaning in the language to which the word belongs. [4] "Meaning" here refers to whatever should be represented by a good dictionary. For instance, the word "bank" has several distinct lexical definitions, including "financial institution" and "edge of a river".
False authority (single authority) – using an expert of dubious credentials or using only one opinion to promote a product or idea. Related to the appeal to authority. False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are given as the only possible options when, in reality, there ...
An opinion is said to be unqualified when he or she does not have any significant reservation in respect of matters contained in the Financial Statements. The most frequent type of report is referred to as the "Unqualified Opinion", and is regarded by many as the equivalent of a "clean bill of health" to a patient, which has led many to call it the "Clean Opinion", but in reality it is not a ...
Say the wrong thing at work, and you could lose your job. Utter an “unacceptable” thought on a college campus, and you could wind up in front of a tribunal. Trump is many things, but woke isn ...
Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to the depth of detail, the quantity of text, prominence of placement, the juxtaposition of statements, and the use of imagery. In articles specifically relating to a minority viewpoint, such views may receive more attention and space.
Dr. Bernstein says the word is a great way to end a card, noting it works for various audiences. "This method implies feelings of care and affection but isn’t as risky or personal as stating the ...
Clinging to hegemony leads only to more costly interventions and strategic failures, as evidenced by recent decades of U.S. foreign policy.
Fair comment: Statements made with an honest belief in their soundness on a matter of public interest (such as regarding official acts) are defendable against a defamation claim, even if such arguments are logically unsound; if a reasonable person could honestly entertain such an opinion, the statement is protected.