Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In philosophy, proving too much is a logical fallacy which occurs when an argument reaches the desired conclusion in such a way as to make that conclusion only a special case or corollary consequence of a larger, obviously absurd conclusion. It is a fallacy because, if the reasoning were valid, it would hold for the absurd conclusion.
Proving too much – an argument that results in an overly generalized conclusion (e.g.: arguing that drinking alcohol is bad because in some instances it has led to spousal or child abuse). Psychologist's fallacy – an observer presupposes the objectivity of their own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event.
This fear is also defined as "the inhibited capacity of an individual, because of anxiety, to exchange thought and feelings of personal significance with another individual who is highly valued". [1] Fear of intimacy is the expression of existential views in that to love and to be loved makes life seem precious and death more inevitable. [2]
That’s why, for much of human history, the marriage historian Stephanie Coontz writes, people thought lifelong partnership was “too important” to be left up to love. Marriage was a business contract. Families used it to acquire lands, to create stable legacies on which their next generations could build.
[4] and that "love is being in actuality and love is the moving power of life" [5] and that an understanding of this should lead us to "turn from the naive nominalism in which the modern world lives". [6] The theologian Michael Lloyd suggests that "In the end there are basically only two possible sets of views about the universe in which we live.
The Jonah complex is the fear of success or the fear of being one's best. This fear prevents self-actualization, or the realization of one's own potential. [1] [2] It is the fear of one's own greatness, the evasion of one's destiny, or the avoidance of exercising one's talents.
The risk is usually when a person has confronted any emotional turmoil relating to love but also can be a chronic phobia. [citation needed] This affects the quality of life and pushes a person away from commitment. A negative aspect of this fear of being in love or falling in love is that it keeps a person in solitude. It can also evolve out of ...
Zeno's arguments may then be early examples of a method of proof called reductio ad absurdum, also known as proof by contradiction. Thus Plato has Zeno say the purpose of the paradoxes "is to show that their hypothesis that existences are many, if properly followed up, leads to still more absurd results than the hypothesis that they are one."