Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man"), instead of the opponent's proposition.
The person making the argument expects that the listener will accept the provided definition, making the argument difficult to refute. [19] Divine fallacy (argument from incredulity) – arguing that, because something is so phenomenal or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency. [20]
refute – The traditional meaning of refute is "disprove" or "dispel with reasoned arguments". It is now often used as a synonym for "deny". It is now often used as a synonym for "deny". The latter sense is listed without comment by M-W [ 110 ] and AHD4, [ 111 ] while CHAMBERS tags it as colloquial. [ 112 ]
An objection can be issued against an argument retroactively from the point of reference of that argument. This form of objection – invented by the presocratic philosopher Parmenides – is commonly referred to as a retroactive refutation. [3]
During a typical Gish gallop, the galloper confronts an opponent with a rapid series of specious arguments, half-truths, misrepresentations and outright lies, making it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of the debate. [2] Each point raised by the Gish galloper takes considerably longer to refute than to assert.
The pragmatic theory finds its roots in the Aristotelian conception of a fallacy as a sophistical refutation but also supports the view that many of the types of arguments traditionally labeled as fallacies are in fact reasonable techniques of argumentation that can be used, in many cases, to support legitimate goals of dialogue.
In law, rebuttal is a form of evidence that is presented to contradict or nullify other evidence that has been presented by an adverse party. By analogy the same term is used in politics and public affairs to refer to the informal process by which statements, designed to refute or negate specific arguments (see Counterclaim) put forward by opponents, are deployed in the media.
Prior to Brandolini's definition, Italian blogger Uriel Fanelli and Jonathan Koomey, creator of Koomey's law and researcher, also shared thoughts aligning with the bullshit asymmetry principle, Fanelli stated, "An idiot can create more bullshit than you could ever hope to refute", when generally translated in Calling Bullshit: The Art of ...