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.
The U.S. surgeon general Dr. Vivek Murthy told The Guardian that as of 2024, there is no data proving that social media is not harmful to children and adolescents. He says that governments having ...
Buy Now: amazon.com #8 Keep Your Home Clean With The Mudbuster Portable Dog Paw Cleaner. Review: "Best thing ever during those spring break up and/or thise rainy muddy autumns.I have a golden ...
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; [1] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. [2] Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy, but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or ...
(Fine imagery for a Katy Perry song, but no way to live your life.) While thought-provoking questions are usually not easy to answer, Kind says they can "help you figure out how you want to make ...
That is, reasoning based on inferring general conclusions from specific observations. This is a problem because induction is widely used in everyday life and scientific reasoning, e.g., "The sun has risen in the east every day, therefore it will rise in the east tomorrow." Various philosophers have proposed solutions or alternative perspectives:
Reductio ad absurdum, painting by John Pettie exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1884. In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.