Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Argumentum ad populum is a type of informal fallacy, [1][14] specifically a fallacy of relevance, [15][16] and is similar to an argument from authority (argumentum ad verecundiam). [14][4][9] It uses an appeal to the beliefs, tastes, or values of a group of people, [12] stating that because a certain opinion or attitude is held by a majority ...
The argument from authority is a logical fallacy, [2] and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible. [3][4] However, in particular circumstances, it is sound to use as a practical although fallible way of obtaining information that can be considered generally likely to be correct if the authority is a real and pertinent intellectual authority ...
Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that a compromise between two positions is always correct. [ 15 ] Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy, decision-point fallacy) – improperly ...
Not to be confused with Calling the question. In classical rhetoric and logic, begging the question or assuming the conclusion (Latin: petītiō principiī) is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion. Historically, begging the question refers to a fault in a dialectical argument in which ...
For the informal fallacy that applies a rule beyond its scope, see Accident (fallacy). The association fallacy is a formal logical fallacy that asserts that properties of one thing must also be properties of another thing if both things belong to the same group. For example, a fallacious arguer may claim that "bears are animals, and bears are ...
Argumentum ad baculum (Latin for "argument to the cudgel " or " appeal to the stick ") is the fallacy committed when one makes an appeal to force[ 1 ] to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion. [ 2 ][ 3 ] One participates in argumentum ad baculum when one emphasizes the negative consequences of holding the contrary position, regardless of ...
A formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow") is a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument that renders the argument invalid. The flaw can be expressed in the standard system of logic. [ 1 ] Such an argument is always considered to be wrong.
v. t. e. Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; [ 1 ] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. [ 2 ] Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy, but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need ...