When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Two wrongs don't make a right - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_wrongs_don't_make_a_right

    "Two wrongs make a right" has been considered as a fallacy of relevance, in which an allegation of wrongdoing is countered with a similar allegation. Its antithesis , "two wrongs don't make a right", is a proverb used to rebuke or renounce wrongful conduct as a response to another's transgression.

  3. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    Two wrongs make a right – assuming that, if one wrong is committed, another wrong will rectify it. [113] Vacuous truth – a claim that is technically true but meaningless, in the form no A in B has C, when there is no A in B. For example, claiming that no mobile phones in the room are on when there are no mobile phones in the room.

  4. Wikipedia:Two wrongs don't make a right - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Two_wrongs_don't...

    The proverb "two wrongs don't make a right" highlights the illogic of claiming innocence because of someone else's bad behavior.Such excuses are a form of whataboutism and a discrediting tactic.

  5. Tu quoque - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

    Tu quoque [a] is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, so that the opponent appears hypocritical.

  6. False equivalence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

    Apples and oranges are both similar-sized seeded fruits that grow on trees, but that does not make the two interchangeable. A false equivalence or false equivalency is an informal fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. [1]

  7. Equivocation - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

    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]

  8. Argument from authority - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

    An argument from authority [a] is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority figure (or figures) is used as evidence to support an argument. [1]The argument from authority is a logical fallacy, [2] and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible.

  9. Slippery slope - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

    [citation needed] When the initial step is not demonstrably likely to result in the claimed effects, this is called the slippery slope fallacy. This is a type of informal fallacy , and is a subset of continuum fallacy , in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B.