Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
This argument is a form of genetic fallacy; in which the conclusion about the validity of a statement is justified by appealing to the characteristics of the person who is speaking, such as also in the ad hominem fallacy. [15] For this argument, Locke coined the term argumentum ad verecundiam (appeal to shamefacedness/modesty) because it ...
Appeal to poverty (argumentum ad Lazarum) – supporting a conclusion because the arguer is poor (or refuting because the arguer is wealthy). (Opposite of appeal to wealth.) [89] Appeal to tradition (argumentum ad antiquitatem) – a conclusion supported solely because it has long been held to be true. [90]
Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false. [1] It is also called argument to logic ( argumentum ad logicam ), the fallacy fallacy , [ 2 ] the fallacist's fallacy , [ 3 ] and the bad reasons fallacy .
Argumentum ad nauseam - repeating remarks, typically with "walls of text" which lack evidence; Argumentum ad verecundiam - argument from authority, as if evidence is not needed; Straw man fallacy - using a related case, as implying the same conclusion; Slippery slope fallacy - implying that 1 or 2 edits will lead to dozens
In law, an argument from inconvenience or argumentum ab inconvenienti, is a valid type of appeal to consequences. Such an argument would seek to show that a proposed action would have unreasonably inconvenient consequences, as for example a law that would require a person wishing to lend money against a security to first ascertain the borrower ...
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; Argumentum ad logicam; Argumentum ad misericordiam; Argumentum ad novitatem; Argumentum ad populum; Argumentum ad ...
The Latin form of the expression comes from the Roman orator and philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BC) in his theological studies De Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the Gods) and is his translation of the Greek expression (with the identical meaning) autòs épha (αὐτὸς ἔφα), an argument from authority made by the disciples of Pythagoras when appealing to the ...
Poisoning the well can take the form of an (explicit or implied) argument, and is considered by some philosophers an informal fallacy. [1] A poisoned-well "argument" has the following form: Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented by another (e.g.