Views
Graph
Explorer
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 levels
Load all levels
All
Dagre
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 level
Load all levels
All
Tree
SpaceTree
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Radial
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Box
Focus
Expanding
Down
Up
All
Down
Page ✓
Article
Outline
Document
Down
All
Canvas
Time
Timeline
Calendar
Request email digest
Past 24 hours
Past 2 days
Past 3 days
Past week
Add
Add page
Add comment
Add citation
Edit
Edit page
Delete page
Share
Link
Bookmark
Embed
Social media
Login
Member login
Register now for a free account
🔎
Informal fallacies
Issue
1
#130709
Informal fallicies – arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (formal) flaws and which usually require examination of the argument's content.
CONTEXT
(Help)
-
Fallacies »
Fallacies
Fallacies☜A fallacy is incorrect argumentation in logic and rhetoric resulting in a lack of validity, or more generally, a lack of soundness – and, where applicable, you can use Pointer cross-relations from ideas on other maps to indicate that the idea is fallacious (and why). ☜F1CEB7
■
Informal fallacies
Informal fallacies☜Informal fallicies – arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (formal) flaws and which usually require examination of the arguments content.☜FFB597
●
(Shifting the) Burden of proof »
(Shifting the) Burden of proof
(Shifting the) Burden of proof☜(Shifting the) Burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false.☜59C6EF
●
Argument from ignorance »
Argument from ignorance
Argument from ignorance☜Argument from ignorance (appeal to ignorance, argumentum ad ignorantiam) – assuming that a claim is true (or false) because it has not been proven false (true) or cannot be proven false (true).☜59C6EF
●
Argument from repetition »
Argument from repetition
Argument from repetition☜Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam) – signifies that it has been discussed extensively until nobody cares to discuss it anymore.☜59C6EF
●
Argument from silence »
Argument from silence
Argument from silence☜Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – where the conclusion is based on silence of opponent, failing to give proof, based on lack of evidence.☜59C6EF
●
Argument to moderation »
Argument to moderation
Argument to moderation☜Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct.☜59C6EF
●
Argumentum verbosium »
Argumentum verbosium
Argumentum verbosium☜ Proof by verbosity.☜59C6EF
●
Begging the question »
Begging the question
Begging the question☜Begging the question (petitio principii) – where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises.☜59C6EF
●
Circular cause and consequence »
Circular cause and consequence
Circular cause and consequence☜Circular cause and consequence – where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause.☜59C6EF
●
Continuum fallacy »
Continuum fallacy
Continuum fallacy☜Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy) – improperly rejecting a claim for being imprecise.☜59C6EF
●
Correlation does not imply causation »
Correlation does not imply causation
Correlation does not imply causation☜Correlation does not imply causation (cum hoc ergo propter hoc) – a faulty assumption that correlation between two variables implies that one causes the other.☜59C6EF
●
Correlative-based fallacies »
Correlative-based fallacies
Correlative-based fallacies☜☜59C6EF
●
Ecological fallacy »
Ecological fallacy
Ecological fallacy☜Ecological fallacy – inferences about the nature of specific individuals are based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which those individuals belong.☜59C6EF
●
Equivocation »
Equivocation
Equivocation☜Equivocation – the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).☜59C6EF
●
Etymological fallacy »
Etymological fallacy
Etymological fallacy☜Etymological fallacy – which reasons that the original or historical meaning of a word or phrase is necessarily similar to its actual present-day meaning.☜59C6EF
●
Fallacy of composition »
Fallacy of composition
Fallacy of composition☜Fallacy of composition – assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole.☜59C6EF
●
Fallacy of division »
Fallacy of division
Fallacy of division☜Fallacy of division – assuming that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts.☜59C6EF
●
Fallacy of many questions »
Fallacy of many questions
Fallacy of many questions☜Fallacy of many questions (complex question, fallacy of presupposition, loaded question, plurium interrogationum) – someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved.☜59C6EF
●
Fallacy of the single cause »
Fallacy of the single cause
Fallacy of the single cause☜Fallacy of the single cause (causal oversimplification) – it is assumed that there is one, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.☜59C6EF
●
False attribution »
False attribution
False attribution☜False attribution – an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument.☜59C6EF
●
False dilemma »
False dilemma
False dilemma☜False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.☜59C6EF
●
Gambler's fallacy »
Gambler's fallacy
Gambler's fallacy☜Gamblers fallacy – the incorrect belief that separate, independent events can affect the likelihood of another random event.☜59C6EF
●
Historian's fallacy »
Historian's fallacy
Historian's fallacy☜Historians fallacy – occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision.☜59C6EF
●
Homunculus fallacy »
Homunculus fallacy
Homunculus fallacy☜Homunculus fallacy – where a middle-man is used for explanation, this usually leads to regressive middle-man.☜59C6EF
●
If-by-whiskey »
If-by-whiskey
If-by-whiskey☜If-by-whiskey – an argument that supports both sides of an issue by using terms that are selectively emotionally sensitive.☜59C6EF
●
Ignoratio elenchi »
Ignoratio elenchi
Ignoratio elenchi☜Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion, missing the point) – an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.☜59C6EF
●
Incomplete comparison »
Incomplete comparison
Incomplete comparison☜Incomplete comparison – where not enough information is provided to make a complete comparison.☜59C6EF
●
Inconsistent comparison »
Inconsistent comparison
Inconsistent comparison☜Inconsistent comparison – where different methods of comparison are used, leaving one with a false impression of the whole comparison.☜59C6EF
●
Intentional fallacy »
Intentional fallacy
Intentional fallacy☜Intentional fallacy – addresses the assumption that the meaning intended by the author of a literary work is of primary importance.☜59C6EF
●
Kettle logic »
Kettle logic
Kettle logic☜Kettle logic – using multiple inconsistent arguments to defend a position.☜59C6EF
●
Ludic fallacy »
Ludic fallacy
Ludic fallacy☜Ludic fallacy – the belief that the outcomes of a non-regulated random occurrences can be encapsulated by a statistic; a failure to take into account unknown unknowns in determining the probability of an events taking place.☜59C6EF
●
Mind projection fallacy »
Mind projection fallacy
Mind projection fallacy☜Mind projection fallacy – when one considers the way he sees the world as the way the world really is.☜59C6EF
●
Moving the goalposts »
Moving the goalposts
Moving the goalposts☜Moving the goalposts (raising the bar) – argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.☜59C6EF
●
Nirvana fallacy »
Nirvana fallacy
Nirvana fallacy☜Nirvana fallacy (perfect solution fallacy) – when solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect.☜59C6EF
●
Onus probandi »
Onus probandi
Onus probandi☜Onus probandi – from Latin onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions the claim).☜59C6EF
●
Petitio principii »
Petitio principii
Petitio principii☜Petitio principii – see begging the question.☜59C6EF
●
Post hoc ergo propter hoc »
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Post hoc ergo propter hoc☜Post hoc ergo propter hoc (false cause, coincidental correlation, correlation not causation) – X happened then Y happened; therefore X caused Y.☜59C6EF
●
Proof by verbosity »
Proof by verbosity
Proof by verbosity☜Proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium, proof by intimidation) – submission of others to an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details. (See also Gish Gallop and argument from authority.)☜59C6EF
●
Prosecutor's fallacy »
Prosecutor's fallacy
Prosecutor's fallacy☜Prosecutors fallacy – a low probability of false matches does not mean a low probability of some false match being found.☜59C6EF
●
Psychologist's fallacy »
Psychologist's fallacy
Psychologist's fallacy☜Psychologists fallacy – an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event.☜59C6EF
●
Red herring »
Red herring
Red herring☜Red herring – a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument which the speaker believes will be easier to speak to.☜59C6EF
●
Regression fallacy »
Regression fallacy
Regression fallacy☜Regression fallacy – ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.☜59C6EF
●
Reification »
Reification
Reification☜Reification (hypostatization) – a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity – i.e. it is the error of treating as a real thing something which is not a real thing, but merely an idea. ☜59C6EF
●
Retrospective determinism »
Retrospective determinism
Retrospective determinism☜Retrospective determinism – the argument that because some event has occurred, its occurrence must have been inevitable beforehand.☜59C6EF
●
Self-contradiction »
Self-contradiction
Self-contradiction☜For example: Absolute rules should never be used is self-contradictory.☜59C6EF
●
Special pleading »
Special pleading
Special pleading☜Special pleading – where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption.☜59C6EF
●
Straw man »
Straw man
Straw man☜Straw man – an argument based on misrepresentation of opponents position twisting his words, or by means of [false]assumptions.☜59C6EF
●
Wrong direction »
Wrong direction
Wrong direction☜Wrong direction – cause and effect are reversed. The cause is said to be the effect and vice versa.☜59C6EF
Heading
Summary
Click the button to enter task scheduling information
Open
Details
Enter task details
Message text
Select assignee(s)
Due date (click calendar)
RadDatePicker
RadDatePicker
Open the calendar popup.
Calendar
Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<
<
April 2024
>
<<
April 2024
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
14
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
15
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
16
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
17
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
18
28
29
30
1
2
3
4
19
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Reminder
No reminder
1 day before due
2 days before due
3 days before due
1 week before due
Ready to post
Copy to text
Enter
Cancel
Task assignment(s) have been emailed and cannot now be altered
Lock
Cancel
Save
Comment graphing options
Choose comments:
Comment only
Whole thread
All comments
Choose location:
To a new map
To this map
New map options
Select map ontology
Options
Standard (default) ontology
College debate ontology
Hypothesis ontology
Influence diagram ontology
Story ontology
Graph to private map
Cancel
Proceed
+Comments (
0
)
- Comments
Add a comment
Newest first
Oldest first
Show threads
+Citations (
0
)
- Citations
Add new citation
List by:
Citerank
Map
+About
- About
Entered by:-
David Price
NodeID:
#130709
Node type:
Issue
Entry date (GMT):
12/6/2011 7:50:00 PM
Last edit date (GMT):
12/6/2011 7:50:00 PM
Show other editors
Incoming cross-relations:
0
Outgoing cross-relations:
0
Average rating:
6
by
1
users
x
Select file to upload