Ad
related to: line drawing fallacy examples list of elements and techniques
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy, decision-point fallacy) – improperly rejecting a claim for being imprecise. [17] Correlative-based fallacies
The continuum fallacy (also known as the fallacy of the beard, [44] [45] line-drawing fallacy, or decision-point fallacy [46]) is an informal fallacy related to the sorites paradox. Both fallacies cause one to erroneously reject a vague claim simply because it is not as precise as one would like it to be.
An example of a language dependent fallacy is given as a debate as to who in humanity are learners: the wise or the ignorant. [18]: 3 A language-independent fallacy is, for example: "Coriscus is different from Socrates." "Socrates is a man." "Therefore, Coriscus is different from a man." [18]: 4
Logic is the formal science of using reason and is considered a branch of both philosophy and mathematics and to a lesser extent computer science.Logic investigates and classifies the structure of statements and arguments, both through the study of formal systems of inference and the study of arguments in natural language.
One of the most fundamental elements of art is the line. An important feature of a line is that it indicates the edge of a two-dimensional (flat) shape or a three-dimensional form. A shape can be indicated by means of an outline, and a three-dimensional form can be indicated by contour lines. [1]
This fallacy is committed, for example, when a person argues that "the burglars entered by the front door" based on the premises "the burglars forced the lock" and "if the burglars entered by the front door, then they forced the lock". [100] This fallacy is similar to the valid rule of inference known as modus ponens.
It consists of treating together, as parts of a single conceptual whole or 'package,' elements which differ essentially in nature, truth-status, importance, or value." [2] It is important to stress that the package deal fallacy concerns solely those errors of reasoning which mistreat the essential characteristics of concepts.
Reductio ad absurdum, painting by John Pettie exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1884. In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.