Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In logic, equivocation ("calling two different things by the same name") is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word or expression in multiple senses within an argument. [1] [2] It is a type of ambiguity that stems from a phrase having two or more distinct meanings, not from the grammar or structure of the sentence. [1]
Equivocation – using a term with more than one meaning in a statement without specifying which meaning is intended. [21] Ambiguous middle term – using a middle term with multiple meanings. [22] Definitional retreat – changing the meaning of a word when an objection is raised. [23]
In logic and mathematics, statements and are said to be logically equivalent if they have the same truth value in every model. [1] The logical equivalence of p {\displaystyle p} and q {\displaystyle q} is sometimes expressed as p ≡ q {\displaystyle p\equiv q} , p :: q {\displaystyle p::q} , E p q {\displaystyle {\textsf {E}}pq} , or p q ...
propositional logic, Boolean algebra, Heyting algebra: is false when A is true and B is false but true otherwise. may mean the same as (the symbol may also indicate the domain and codomain of a function; see table of mathematical symbols).
Venn diagram for "A or B", with inclusive or (OR) Venn diagram for "A or B", with exclusive or (XOR). The fallacy lies in concluding that one disjunct must be false because the other disjunct is true; in fact they may both be true because "or" is defined inclusively rather than exclusively.
A semantic value that plays the same role for logical consequence as the role played by truth in classical logic, so that, for the consequence to hold, a designated value must be assigned to the conclusion if it is assigned to the premises. [96] [97] [98] destructive dilemma
A pangram is a sentence that includes every letter of the alphabet, A through Z. You’ve most likely heard of the pangram involving the quick brown fox, but there are actually many more examples.
In everyday reasoning, the fallacy of four terms occurs most frequently by equivocation: using the same word or phrase but with a different meaning each time, creating a fourth term even though only three distinct words are used. The resulting argument sounds like the (valid) first example above, but is in fact structured like the invalid ...