Ad
related to: how to identify fallacies easily and naturally
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Syllogistic fallacies – logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms. Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative) – a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but at least one negative premise. [11] Fallacy of exclusive premises – a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative ...
Whately divided fallacies into two groups: logical and material. According to Whately, logical fallacies are arguments where the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Material fallacies are not logical errors because the conclusion follows from the premises. He then divided the logical group into two groups: purely logical and semi-logical.
Where an item at the beginning of a list is more easily recalled. A form of serial position effect. See also recency effect and suffix effect. Processing difficulty effect: That information that takes longer to read and is thought about more (processed with more difficulty) is more easily remembered. [174] See also levels-of-processing effect.
The term naturalistic fallacy is sometimes used to label the problematic inference of an ought from an is (the is–ought problem). [3] Michael Ridge relevantly elaborates that "[t]he intuitive idea is that evaluative conclusions require at least one evaluative premise—purely factual premises about the naturalistic features of things do not entail or even support evaluative conclusions."
Informal fallacies are expressed in natural language. Their main fault usually lies not in the form of the argument but has other sources, like its content or context. [96] [99] Some informal fallacies, like some instances of false dilemmas and strawman fallacies, even involve correct deductive reasoning on the formal level. [97]
The distinction between formal and informal fallacies is opposed by deductivists, who hold that deductive invalidity is the reason for all fallacies. [18] One way to explain that some fallacies do not seem to be deductively invalid is to hold that they contain various hidden assumptions, as is common for natural language arguments.
Formal fallacies are fallacies within the scope of formal logic whereas informal fallacies belong to informal logic. [ 27 ] Formal logic is concerned with the validity of inferences or arguments based only on their form, i.e. independent of their specific content and the context in which they are used. [ 18 ]
Informal fallacies are sometimes categorized as fallacies of ambiguity, fallacies of presumption, or fallacies of relevance. For fallacies of ambiguity, the ambiguity and vagueness of natural language are responsible for their flaw, as in "feathers are light; what is light cannot be dark; therefore feathers cannot be dark". [90]