Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Informal fallacies – arguments that are logically unsound for lack of well-grounded premises. [14] Argument from incredulity – when someone can't imagine something to be true, and therefore deems it false, or conversely, holds that it must be true because they can't see how it could be false. [15]
Hasty generalization is the fallacy of examining just one or very few examples or studying a single case and generalizing that to be representative of the whole class of objects or phenomena. The opposite, slothful induction , is the fallacy of denying the logical conclusion of an inductive argument, dismissing an effect as "just a coincidence ...
A historian listed over 100 fallacies in a dozen categories including those of generalization and those of causation. [3] A few of the fallacies are explicitly or potentially statistical including sampling, statistical nonsense, statistical probability, false extrapolation, false interpolation and insidious generalization.
Creating a false dilemma (either-or fallacy) in which the situation is oversimplified, also called false dichotomy; Selectively using facts (card stacking) Making false or misleading comparisons (false equivalence or false analogy) Generalizing quickly and sloppily (hasty generalization) (secundum quid)
In logic and mathematics, proof by example (sometimes known as inappropriate generalization) is a logical fallacy whereby the validity of a statement is illustrated through one or more examples or cases—rather than a full-fledged proof. [1] [2] The structure, argument form and formal form of a proof by example generally proceeds as follows ...
This category is for inductive fallacies, or faulty generalizations, arguments that improperly move from specific instances to general rules. Pages in category "Inductive fallacies" The following 21 pages are in this category, out of 21 total.
The description of the fallacy in this form is attributed to British philosopher Antony Flew, who wrote, in his 1966 book God & Philosophy, . In this ungracious move a brash generalization, such as No Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge, when faced with falsifying facts, is transformed while you wait into an impotent tautology: if ostensible Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge, then this is ...
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] Colloquially, a false equivalence is often called "comparing apples and oranges."