Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It is a proposition that is unconditionally false (i.e., a self-contradictory proposition). [2][3]This can be generalized to a collection of propositions, which is then said to "contain" a contradiction. History. [edit] By creation of a paradox, Plato's Euthydemusdialogue demonstrates the need for the notion of contradiction.
In logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e. g. the two propositions " p is the case " and " p is not the case " are mutually ...
In logic, proof by contradiction is a form of proof that establishes the truth or the validity of a proposition by showing that assuming the proposition to be false leads to a contradiction. Although it is quite freely used in mathematical proofs, not every school of mathematical thought accepts this kind of nonconstructive proof as universally ...
A paradox is a logically self-contradictory statement or a statement that runs contrary to one's expectation. [ 1 ][ 2 ] It is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true or apparently true premises, leads to a seemingly self-contradictory or a logically unacceptable conclusion. [ 3 ][ 4 ] A paradox usually involves ...
An argument is valid if and only if it would be contradictory for the conclusion to be false if all of the premises are true. [3] Validity does not require the truth of the premises, instead it merely necessitates that conclusion follows from the premises without violating the correctness of the logical form.
Reductio ad absurdum, painting by John Pettie exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1884. In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.
Mind projection fallacy – assuming that a statement about an object describes an inherent property of the object, rather than a personal perception. Moralistic fallacy – inferring factual conclusions from evaluative premises in violation of fact–value distinction (e.g.: inferring is from ought).
Argument. An argument is a series of sentences, statements, or propositions some of which are called premises and one is the conclusion. [1] The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's conclusion via justification, explanation, and/or persuasion. Arguments are intended to determine or show the degree of truth or acceptability of ...