Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Fallacious ad hominem reasoning is categorized among informal fallacies, more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance. [12] Ad hominem fallacies can be separated into various types, such as tu quoque, circumstantial ad hominem, guilt by association, and abusive ad hominem.
The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue) [1] is a fallacy of irrelevance in which arguments or information are dismissed or validated based solely on their source of origin rather than their content. In other words, a claim is ignored or given credibility based on its source rather than the claim itself.
Pages in category "Genetic fallacies" The following 24 pages are in this category, out of 24 total. ... Genetic fallacy; A. Ad hominem; Ad personam; Appeal to ...
This type of ad hominem is not a fallacy.) Circumstantial ad hominem – stating that the arguer's personal situation or perceived benefit from advancing a conclusion means that their conclusion is wrong. [73] Poisoning the well – a subtype of ad hominem presenting adverse information about a target person with the intention of discrediting ...
This argument is a form of genetic fallacy; in which the conclusion about the validity of a statement is justified by appealing to the characteristics of the person who is speaking, such as also in the ad hominem fallacy. [17]
A formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow") is a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument that renders the argument invalid. The flaw can be expressed in the standard system of logic. [ 1 ]
Bulverism is a type of ad hominem rhetorical fallacy that combines circular reasoning and the genetic fallacy with presumption or condescension. The Bulverist assumes a speaker's argument is invalid or false and then explains why the speaker came to make that mistake or to be so silly (even if the opponent's claim is actually right) by ...
Poisoning the well can take the form of an (explicit or implied) argument, and is considered by some philosophers an informal fallacy. [1] A poisoned-well "argument" has the following form: Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented by another (e.g.