Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The person making the argument expects that the listener will accept the provided definition, making the argument difficult to refute. [19] Divine fallacy (argument from incredulity) – arguing that, because something is so phenomenal or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency. [20]
Defeasibility is found in literatures that are concerned with argument and the process of argument, or heuristic reasoning. Defeasible reasoning is a particular kind of non-demonstrative reasoning , where the reasoning does not produce a full, complete, or final demonstration of a claim, i.e., where fallibility and corrigibility of a conclusion ...
Minimal logic, or minimal calculus, is a symbolic logic system originally developed by Ingebrigt Johansson. [1] It is an intuitionistic and paraconsistent logic , that rejects both the law of the excluded middle as well as the principle of explosion ( ex falso quodlibet ), and therefore holding neither of the following two derivations as valid:
Image credits: PapaYeehaw People often tend to believe things more if a lot of other folks trust the same idea. Studies have found that sometimes false beliefs are adopted just because of their ...
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 ...
The invincible ignorance fallacy, [1] also known as argument by pigheadedness, [2] is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word. The method used ...
Correspondence theory is a traditional model which goes back at least to some of the ancient Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. [2] [3] This class of theories holds that the truth or the falsity of a representation is determined solely by how it relates to a reality; that is, by whether it accurately describes that reality.
Since assuming P to be false leads to a contradiction, it is concluded that P is in fact true. An important special case is the existence proof by contradiction: in order to demonstrate that an object with a given property exists, we derive a contradiction from the assumption that all objects satisfy the negation of the property.