Ad
related to: argumentum ad prius 5
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Proof by intimidation (or argumentum verbosum) is a jocular phrase used mainly in mathematics to refer to a specific form of hand-waving whereby one attempts to advance an argument by giving an argument loaded with jargon and obscure results or by marking it as obvious or trivial. [1]
The argument runs thus: Galileo was ridiculed in his time for his scientific observations, but was later acknowledged to be right; the proponent argues that since their non-mainstream views are provoking ridicule and rejection from other scientists, they will later be recognized as correct, like Galileo. [5]
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 ...
A dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid; Ad antiquitatem; Ad hominem; Ad infinitum; Ad nauseam; Ad personam; Argumentum a fortiori; Argumentum ad antiquitatem; Argumentum ad baculum; Argumentum ad captandum; Argumentum ad consequentiam; Argumentum ad crumenam; Argumentum ad ignorantiam; Argumentum ad lapidem; Argumentum ad lazarum ...
Appeal to the stone, also known as argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation.
Often said of or used by politicians. Likewise, an argumentum ad captandum is an argument designed to please the crowd. ad clerum: to the clergy: Formal letter or communication in the Christian tradition from a bishop to his clergy. An ad clerum may be an encouragement in a time of celebration or a technical explanation of new regulations or ...
Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false. [1] It is also called argument to logic ( argumentum ad logicam ), the fallacy fallacy , [ 2 ] the fallacist's fallacy , [ 3 ] and the bad reasons fallacy .
The form of the post hoc fallacy is expressed as follows: . A occurred, then B occurred.; Therefore, A caused B. When B is undesirable, this pattern is often combined with the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent, assuming the logical inverse holds: believing that avoiding A will prevent B.