Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy, [1] is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine. Arguments from incredulity can take the form:
Argument from incredulity (appeal to common sense) – "I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false." [ 65 ] Argument from repetition ( argumentum ad nauseam or argumentum ad infinitum ) – repeating an argument until nobody cares to discuss it any more and referencing that lack of objection as evidence of support for ...
The common sense is where this comparison happens, and this must occur by comparing impressions (or symbols or markers; σημεῖον, sēmeîon, 'sign, mark') of what the specialist senses have perceived. [16] The common sense is therefore also where a type of consciousness originates, "for it makes us aware of having sensations at all". And ...
Common sense is a commodity. In some years, it seems to be in shorter supply than at other times. The current decade has already had its shortages and surpluses of it. Fortunately, there are ...
Greater likelihood of recalling recent, nearby, or otherwise immediately available examples, and the imputation of importance to those examples over others. Bizarreness effect: Bizarre material is better remembered than common material. Boundary extension: Remembering the background of an image as being larger or more expansive than the ...
Some definitions and characterizations of common sense from different authors include: "Commonsense knowledge includes the basic facts about events (including actions) and their effects, facts about knowledge and how it is obtained, facts about beliefs and desires. It also includes the basic facts about material objects and their properties." [2]
There is a debate over whether the argument from ignorance is always fallacious. It is generally accepted that there are only special circumstances in which this argument may not be fallacious. For example, with the presumption of innocence in legal cases, it would make sense to argue: [5] It has not been proven that the defendant is guilty.
Example 3. In other cases it may simply be unclear which is the cause and which is the effect. For example: Children that watch a lot of TV are the most violent. Clearly, TV makes children more violent. This could easily be the other way round; that is, violent children like watching more TV than less violent ones. Example 4