Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Credulity is a person's willingness or ability to believe that a statement is true, especially on minimal or uncertain evidence. [1] [2] Credulity is not necessarily a belief in something that may be false: the subject of the belief may even be correct, but a credulous person will believe it without good evidence.
Plausible deniability is the ability of people, typically senior officials in a formal or informal chain of command, to deny knowledge of or responsibility for actions committed by or on behalf of members of their organizational hierarchy.
Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy, [1] is a fallacy in informal logic.It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.
Irreligion is the absence or rejection of religious beliefs or practices.It encompasses a wide range of viewpoints drawn from various philosophical and intellectual perspectives, including atheism, agnosticism, religious skepticism, rationalism, secularism, and non-religious spirituality.
The words gullible and credulous are commonly used as synonyms. Goepp & Kay (1984) state that while both words mean "unduly trusting or confiding", gullibility stresses being duped or made a fool of, suggesting a lack of intelligence, whereas credulity stresses uncritically forming beliefs, suggesting a lack of skepticism. [4]
A non sequitur (English: / n ɒ n ˈ s ɛ k w ɪ t ər / non SEK-wit-ər, Classical Latin: [noːn ˈsɛkᶣɪtʊr]; "[it] does not follow") is a conversational literary device, often used for comedic purposes.
In the context of knowledge management, the closed-world assumption is used in at least two situations: (1) when the knowledge base is known to be complete (e.g., a corporate database containing records for every employee), and (2) when the knowledge base is known to be incomplete but a "best" definite answer must be derived from incomplete information.
In nonmonotonic reasoning, the Nixon diamond is a scenario in which default assumptions lead to mutually inconsistent conclusions. The scenario is: usually, Quakers are pacifist