Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In philosophy, proving too much is a logical fallacy which occurs when an argument reaches the desired conclusion in such a way as to make that conclusion only a special case or corollary consequence of a larger, obviously absurd conclusion. It is a fallacy because, if the reasoning were valid, it would hold for the absurd conclusion.
Prosecutor's fallacy – a low probability of false matches does not mean a low probability of some false match being found. [43] [44] Proving too much – an argument that results in an overly generalized conclusion (e.g.: arguing that drinking alcohol is bad because in some instances it has led to spousal or child abuse).
[13] [c] According to classicist Charles H. Kahn, this fragment echoes a traditional belief that "know thyself" had an essentially similar meaning to the second Delphic maxim, "nothing too much"; both sayings might be considered alternative ways of describing the virtue of sophrosyne (lit. "soundness of mind"). [13]
I mean because that's his ex-wife. But Burnett says that as time went by, it was Edgar's behavior that became the most menacing. Taylor Barnett: He was pretty much abusive … in more ways than ...
The allure of multitasking is hard to ignore. Of course it sounds like a great idea to take that meeting from the car, or to have Real Housewives on “in the background” while you work, or to ...
Main Article : Nothing too much In ancient Greece, the maxim "Nothing too much" was only rarely understood to mean that one should place limits on one's physical appetites, being far more commonly invoked as a reminder to avoid excessive emotion, particularly excessive grief. [ 18 ]
Ex-NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton says the city needs more cops to crack down on subway mayhem and other crime, noting there were thousands more officers when he was first in charge in the 1990s.
Russell's teapot modelled on the Ichthys.. Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, as opposed to shifting the burden of disproof to others.