Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An especially annoying variant is the Gish gallop, in which someone tries to "win" an argument by posting point after point so that no one can keep up. This is especially disruptive on Wikipedia; repeated edit conflicts make it difficult to post responses people actually bothered to write, and even one massive post making 20 points when 5 would ...
One of the most significant arguments generative grammarians have for linguistic nativism is the poverty of the stimulus argument. [4] [5] [6] Pullum and Scholz frame the poverty of the stimulus argument by examining all of the ways that the input is insufficient for language acquisition. [7] First, children are exposed only to positive evidence.
In logic, an argument is a set of related statements expressing the premises (which may consists of non-empirical evidence, empirical evidence or may contain some axiomatic truths) and a necessary conclusion based on the relationship of the premises. An argument is valid if and only if it would be contradictory for the conclusion to be false if ...
Oral argument at the appellate level accompanies written briefs, which also advance the argument of each party in the legal dispute. A closing argument, or summation, is the concluding statement of each party's counsel reiterating the important arguments for the trier of fact, often the jury, in a court case. A closing argument occurs after the ...
Proof by assertion can also occur when the evidence cited is actually no different than the assertion itself. An argument that actually contains premises that are all the same as the assertion is thus proof by assertion. This fallacy is sometimes used as a form of rhetoric by politicians, or during a debate as a filibuster.
Argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio) – assuming that a claim is true based on the absence of textual or spoken evidence from an authoritative source, or vice versa. [ 68 ] Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion, missing the point) – an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.
An inductive argument affirms, not that a certain matter of fact is so, but that relative to certain evidence there is a probability in its favour. The validity of the induction, relative to the original evidence, is not upset, therefore, if, as a fact, the truth turns out to be otherwise. [20] This approach was endorsed by Bertrand Russell. [21]
Unconditional positive regard, a concept initially developed by Stanley Standal in 1954, [1] later expanded and popularized by the humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers in 1956, is the basic acceptance and support of a person regardless of what the person says or does, especially in the context of client-centred therapy. [2]