Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An appeal to pity (also called argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, or the Galileo argument) [1] [2] is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting one's opponent's feelings of pity or guilt.
This type of ad hominem is not a fallacy.) Circumstantial ad hominem – stating that the arguer's personal situation or perceived benefit from advancing a conclusion means that their conclusion is wrong. [73] Poisoning the well – a subtype of ad hominem presenting adverse information about a target person with the intention of discrediting ...
Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones (meaning the same in Latin) is an informal fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. [1]
A naturalistic fallacy can occur, for example, in the case of sheer quantity metrics based on the premise "more is better" [43] or, in the case of developmental assessment in the field of psychology, "higher is better". [46] A false analogy occurs when claims are supported by unsound comparisons between data points.
A dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid; Ad antiquitatem; Ad hominem; Ad infinitum; Ad nauseam; Ad personam; Argumentum a fortiori; Argumentum ad antiquitatem; Argumentum ad baculum; Argumentum ad captandum; Argumentum ad consequentiam; Argumentum ad crumenam; Argumentum ad ignorantiam; Argumentum ad lapidem; Argumentum ad lazarum ...
Invented by Leo Strauss in 1953, reductio ad Hitlerum takes its name from the term used in logic called reductio ad absurdum ("reduction to the absurd"). [4] According to Strauss, reductio ad Hitlerum is a type of ad hominem, ad misericordiam, or a fallacy of irrelevance. The suggested rationale is one of guilt by association.
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.
This fallacy has the following argument form: Either P or Q is true. Q is frightening. Therefore, P is true. The argument is invalid. The appeal to emotion is used in exploiting existing fears to create support for the speaker's proposal, namely P. Also, often the false dilemma fallacy is involved, suggesting Q is the proposed idea's sole ...