Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments is a book on critical thinking written by Ali Almossawi and illustrated by Alejandro Giraldo. The book describes 19 logical fallacies using a set of illustrations, in which various cartoon characters participate. The online version of the book was published under a Creative Commons license on July 15, 2013. [1]
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.
It is a non-fiction book that aims to help people learn critical thinking skills, recognize logical fallacies and biases, and better test the veracity of information received through mass media. It won the Mavis Gallant Prize for non-fiction, [ 4 ] The National Business Book Award , [ 5 ] a Silver Medal from the Axiom Business Book Awards, [ 6 ...
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.
When referring to a generalization made from a single example, the terms fallacy of the lonely fact, [8] or the fallacy of proof by example, might be used. [ 9 ] When evidence is intentionally excluded to bias the result, the fallacy of exclusion—a form of selection bias —is said to be involved.
When an argument holds that a conclusion is likely to be true precisely because the one who holds or is presenting it lacks authority, it is an "appeal to the common man". [26] When the source of the claim is a false authority, such as when the supposed authority is not a real expert, or when supporting a claim outside of their area of expertise.
In modal logic, a proposition can be necessarily true or false (denoted and , respectively), meaning that it is necessary that it is true or false; or it could be possibly true or false (denoted and ), meaning that it is true or false, but it is not logically necessary that it is so: its truth or falseness is contingent. The modal fallacy ...