Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An exception is analytic philosopher John Searle, who called it an incorrect assumption that produces false dichotomies. Searle insists that "it is a condition of the adequacy of a precise theory of an indeterminate phenomenon that it should precisely characterize that phenomenon as indeterminate; and a distinction is no less a distinction for ...
This logic -related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
If a fair coin lands on heads 10 times in a row, the belief that it is "due to the number of times it had previously landed on tails" is incorrect. [61] Inverse gambler's fallacy – the inverse of the gambler's fallacy. It is the incorrect belief that on the basis of an unlikely outcome, the process must have happened many times before.
Fallacies, despite being incorrect, usually appear to be correct and thereby can seduce people into accepting and using them. These misleading appearances are often connected to various aspects of natural language, such as ambiguous or vague expressions, or the assumption of implicit premises instead of making them explicit.
[157] cf. misinformation effect, where the original memory is affected by incorrect information received later. Context effect That cognition and memory are dependent on context, such that out-of-context memories are more difficult to retrieve than in-context memories (e.g., recall time and accuracy for a work-related memory will be lower at ...
Often, a person will make a negative assumption when it is not fully supported by the facts. [6] In some cases misinterpretation of what a subject has sensed, i.e., the incorrect decoding of incoming messages, can come about due to jumping to conclusions. [7] This can often be because the same sign can have multiple meanings.
Assumptions like these require disabled people to go on the defensive, and that can lead to an argument, rather than a discussion. I’m the first to admit that I haven’t always been great at ...
Begging the question is not considered a formal fallacy (an argument that is defective because it uses an incorrect deductive step). Rather, it is a type of informal fallacy that is logically valid but unpersuasive, in that it fails to prove anything other than what is already assumed. [23] [24] [25]