Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam)—also known as the false compromise, argument from middle ground, fallacy of gray, middle ground fallacy, or golden mean fallacy [1] —is the fallacy that the truth is always in the middle of two opposites.
Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that a compromise between two positions is always correct. [ 16 ] Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy, decision-point fallacy) – improperly ...
Middle ground (also: middle-ground or middleground), an artistic space, located between background and foreground; Middleground (1947–1972), American Thoroughbred racehorse; Golden mean (philosophy), a desirable "middle ground" between two extremes. Argument to moderation, a logical fallacy that states that the "middle ground" is always correct
A formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow") is a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument that renders the argument invalid. The flaw can be expressed in the standard system of logic. [1] Such an argument is always considered to be wrong.
[citation needed] When the initial step is not demonstrably likely to result in the claimed effects, this is called the slippery slope fallacy. This is a type of informal fallacy , and is a subset of continuum fallacy , in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B.
Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments [1] is a textbook on logical fallacies by T. Edward Damer that has been used for many years in a number of college courses on logic, critical thinking, argumentation, and philosophy. It explains 60 of the most commonly committed fallacies.
In logic, the law of excluded middle or the principle of excluded middle states that for every proposition, either this proposition or its negation is true. [1] [2] It is one of the three laws of thought, along with the law of noncontradiction, and the law of identity; however, no system of logic is built on just these laws, and none of these laws provides inference rules, such as modus ponens ...
The fallacy of the undistributed middle occurs when the term that links the two premises is never distributed. In this example, distribution is marked in boldface: All Z is B; All Y is B; Therefore, all Y is Z; B is the common term between the two premises (the middle term) but is never distributed, so this syllogism is invalid.