When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Converse accident - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Converse_accident

    The above argument using converse accident is an argument for full legal use of marijuana given that glaucoma patients use it. The argument based on the slippery slope argues against medicinal use of marijuana because it will lead to full use. [citation needed] The fallacy of converse accident is a form of hasty generalization.

  3. Affirming the consequent - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

    In propositional logic, affirming the consequent (also known as converse error, fallacy of the converse, or confusion of necessity and sufficiency) is a formal fallacy (or an invalid form of argument) that is committed when, in the context of an indicative conditional statement, it is stated that because the consequent is true, therefore the ...

  4. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident, jumping to conclusions) – basing a broad conclusion on a small or unrepresentative sample. [55]

  5. Accident (fallacy) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)

    The fallacy of accident (also called destroying the exception or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid) is an informal fallacy where a general rule is applied to an exceptional case. The fallacy of accident gets its name from the fact that one or more accidental features of the specific case make it an exception to the rule.

  6. Informal fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy

    This explains, for example, why arguments that are accidentally valid are still somehow flawed: because the arguer himself lacks a good reason to believe the conclusion. [9] The fallacy of begging the question, on this perspective, is a fallacy because it fails to expand our knowledge by providing independent justification for its conclusion ...

  7. Inverse gambler's fallacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_gambler's_fallacy

    The inverse gambler's fallacy, named by philosopher Ian Hacking, is a formal fallacy of Bayesian inference which is an inverse of the better known gambler's fallacy.It is the fallacy of concluding, on the basis of an unlikely outcome of a random process, that the process is likely to have occurred many times before.

  8. Did the Crash Scene in 'Ferrari' Really Happen? - AOL

    www.aol.com/lifestyle/did-crash-scene-ferrari...

    It’s a spectacularly operatic melodrama in real life.” The “real life” portion is key here—Mann took some liberties with the details, of course, but the Mille Miglia crash is depicted in ...

  9. Converse (logic) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Converse_(logic)

    For example, the four-vertex theorem was proved in 1912, but its converse was proved only in 1997. [3] In practice, when determining the converse of a mathematical theorem, aspects of the antecedent may be taken as establishing context. That is, the converse of "Given P, if Q then R" will be "Given P, if R then Q".