Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Whately divided fallacies into two groups: logical and material. According to Whately, logical fallacies are arguments where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Material fallacies are not logical errors because the conclusion follows from the premises. He then divided the logical group into two groups: purely logical and semi-logical.
Syllogistic fallacies – logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms. Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative) – a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but at least one negative premise. [11] Fallacy of exclusive premises – a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative ...
Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments [1] is a textbook on logical fallacies by T. Edward Damer that has been used for many years in a number of college courses on logic, critical thinking, argumentation, and philosophy. It explains 60 of the most commonly committed fallacies.
It is a non-fiction book that aims to help people learn critical thinking skills, recognize logical fallacies and biases, and better test the veracity of information received through mass media. It won the Mavis Gallant Prize for non-fiction, [ 4 ] The National Business Book Award , [ 5 ] a Silver Medal from the Axiom Business Book Awards, [ 6 ...
In this regard, logical reasoning should be skeptical and open-minded at the same time. [120] On the practical level, logical reasoning concerns the issue of making rational and effective decisions. [114] [115] For many real-life decisions, various courses of action are available to the agent. For each possible action, there can be conflicting ...
Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false. [1] It is also called argument to logic (argumentum ad logicam), the fallacy fallacy, [2] the fallacist's fallacy, [3] and the bad reasons fallacy.
The scope of logic can therefore be very large, ranging from core topics such as the study of fallacies and paradoxes, to specialized analyses of reasoning such as probability, correct reasoning, and arguments involving causality. One of the aims of logic is to identify the correct (or valid) and incorrect (or fallacious) inferences.
The Spanish version of the book was reviewed by Rafael Martínez for Loffit, and it emphasized how effectively the book's lessons could be learned by listening to various debates heard every day on radio and television, identifying in them examples of logical fallacies that the book explains. [12]