Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Naturalistic fallacy fallacy is a type of argument from fallacy. Straw man fallacy – refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. [110] Texas sharpshooter fallacy – improperly asserting a cause to explain a cluster of data. [111]
Argumentum ad populum is a type of informal fallacy, [1] [14] specifically a fallacy of relevance, [15] [16] and is similar to an argument from authority (argumentum ad verecundiam). [ 14 ] [ 4 ] [ 9 ] It uses an appeal to the beliefs, tastes, or values of a group of people, [ 12 ] stating that because a certain opinion or attitude is held by a ...
Boudry coined the term fallacy fork. [27] For a given fallacy, one must either characterize it by means of a deductive argumentation scheme, which rarely applies (the first prong of the fork), or one must relax definitions and add nuance to take the actual intent and context of the argument into account (the other prong of the fork). [27]
Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments that are usually fallacious.Often currently this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself.
Escalation of commitment, irrational escalation, or sunk cost fallacy, where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong. G. I. Joe fallacy, the tendency to think that knowing about cognitive bias is enough to overcome it. [66]
An attendee at the 2010 Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear wearing a T-shirt implicitly referencing Godwin's Law: "I disagree with you but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler." Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule ), short for Godwin's law of Nazi analogies , [ 1 ] is an Internet adage asserting: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability ...
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X. This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance : it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.
Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about ...?") is a pejorative for the strategy of responding to an accusation with a counter-accusation instead of a defense against the original accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view, whataboutism is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter ...