Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Without verbal cues or tone, sometimes the words we choose to use in a formal email or message can come across the wrong way, especially if we're responding to or sending a message to someone with ...
These delineations include not only the ignorance of the right reasoning standard but also the ignorance of relevant properties of the context. For instance, the soundness of legal arguments depends on the context in which they are made. [4] Fallacies are commonly divided into "formal" and "informal".
Hanlon's razor is an adage or rule of thumb that states: [1]. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. It is a philosophical razor that suggests a way of eliminating unlikely explanations for human behavior.
Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization, which involves reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence [3] —essentially making a rushed conclusion without considering all of the variables or enough evidence.
This may not just be ignorance of potentially obtainable facts but that there is no fact to be found. There is some controversy in physics as to whether such uncertainty is an irreducible property of nature or if there are "hidden variables" that would describe the state of a particle even more exactly than Heisenberg's uncertainty principle ...
An irrelevant conclusion, [1] also known as ignoratio elenchi (Latin for 'ignoring refutation') or missing the point, is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument whose conclusion fails to address the issue in question.
Rational ignorance, a concept in epistemology; Vincible ignorance, a moral or doctrinal matter in Catholic ethics; Ignorantia juris non excusat, literally "ignorance of the law is no excuse", the legal principle that the law applies also to those who are unaware of it; Avidyā (Hinduism), ignorance as a concept in Vedanta
Begging the question is not considered a formal fallacy (an argument that is defective because it uses an incorrect deductive step). Rather, it is a type of informal fallacy that is logically valid but unpersuasive, in that it fails to prove anything other than what is already assumed. [23] [24] [25]