Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence does not bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such:
Creating a false dilemma (either-or fallacy) in which the situation is oversimplified, also called false dichotomy; Selectively using facts (card stacking) Making false or misleading comparisons (false equivalence or false analogy) Generalizing quickly and sloppily (hasty generalization) (secundum quid)
Discover was created primarily through the efforts of Time magazine editor Leon Jaroff.He noticed that magazine sales jumped every time the cover featured a science topic. Jaroff interpreted this as a considerable public interest in science, and in 1971, he began agitating for the creation of a science-oriented magazin
Commentators have also shared concerns about the use of false equivalence as an argument in political fact-checking, citing examples from The Washington Post, The New York Times and The Associated Press where "mainstream fact-checkers appear to have attempted to manufacture false claims from progressive politicians...[out of] a desire to appear ...
[4] This false equivalence can become the expected media behavior. When The New York Times published an article strongly supporting the mainstream scientific stance on thiomersal and vaccines , [ 40 ] others in the media condemned the Times for portraying the alleged vaccine-autism connection as a fringe theory, calling the article a "hit piece".
Since there's no criteria beyond "was described as false equivalence in a RS" we'll just end up with an arbitrary collection of newspaper articles and op-eds. --RaiderAspect 06:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC) Replace with abstract examples False equivalence is an informal fallacy. That means it depends on the way in which the comparison is drawn to ...
So observations have two purposes in Popper's view. On the methodological side, observations can be used to show that a law is false, which Popper calls falsification. On the logical side, observations, which are purely logical constructions, do not show a law to be false, but contradict a law to show its falsifiability.
The description of the fallacy in this form is attributed to British philosopher Antony Flew, who wrote, in his 1966 book God & Philosophy, . In this ungracious move a brash generalization, such as No Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge, when faced with falsifying facts, is transformed while you wait into an impotent tautology: if ostensible Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge, then this is ...