See more List of fallacies articles on AOD.

Powered by
TTSReader
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia


( => ( => ( => List of fallacies [pageid] => 8042940 ) =>

In reasoning to "argue a claim, a "fallacy is reasoning that is evaluated as logically incorrect and that vitiates the "logical validity of the argument and permits its recognition as "unsound. Regardless of their unsoundness, all registers and manners of speech can demonstrate fallacies.

Because of their variety of structure and application, fallacies are challenging to classify so as to satisfy all practitioners. Fallacies can be classified strictly by either their structure or content, such as classifying them as "formal fallacies or "informal fallacies, respectively. The classification of informal fallacies may be subdivided into categories such as linguistic, relevance through omission, relevance through intrusion, and relevance through presumption.[1] On the other hand, fallacies may be classified by the process by which they occur, such as "material fallacies (content), "verbal fallacies (linguistic), and again formal fallacies (error in inference). In turn, material fallacies may be placed into the more general category of informal fallacies as formal fallacies may be clearly placed into the more precise category of logical or deductive fallacies["clarification needed]. Yet, verbal fallacies may be placed in either informal or deductive classifications; compare "equivocation which is a word or phrase based "ambiguity, e. g. "he is mad", which may refer to either him being angry or clinically insane, to the "fallacy of composition which is premise and inference based ambiguity, e. g. "this must be a good basketball team because each of its members is an outstanding player".[2]

Faulty inferences in "deductive reasoning are common formal or logical fallacies. As the nature of "inductive reasoning is based in "probability, a fallacious inductive argument or one that is potentially misleading, is often classified as "weak".

The conscious or habitual use of fallacies as "rhetorical devices are prevalent in the desire to persuade, when the focus is more on communication and eliciting common agreement rather than the correctness of the reasoning. One may consider the effective use of a fallacy by an orator as clever but by the same token the reasoning of that orator should be recognized as unsound, and thus the orator's claim, supported by an unsound argument, will be regarded as unfounded and dismissed.[3]

Contents

Formal fallacies[edit]

A formal fallacy is an error in logic that can be seen in the "argument's form.[4] All formal fallacies are specific types of "non sequiturs.

Propositional fallacies[edit]

A propositional fallacy is an error in logic that concerns compound propositions. For a compound proposition to be true, the truth values of its constituent parts must satisfy the relevant logical connectives that occur in it (most commonly: <and>, <or>, <not>, <only if>, <if and only if>). The following fallacies involve inferences whose correctness is not guaranteed by the behavior of those logical connectives, and hence, which are not logically guaranteed to yield true conclusions.
Types of "propositional fallacies:

Quantification fallacies[edit]

A quantification fallacy is an error in logic where the quantifiers of the premises are in contradiction to the quantifier of the conclusion.
Types of "Quantification fallacies:

Formal syllogistic fallacies[edit]

"Syllogistic fallacies – logical fallacies that occur in "syllogisms.

Informal fallacies[edit]

Informal fallacies – arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (formal) flaws and usually require examination of the argument's content.[16]

Faulty generalizations[edit]

"Faulty generalizations – reach a conclusion from weak premises. Unlike fallacies of relevance, in fallacies of defective induction, the premises are related to the conclusions yet only weakly buttress the conclusions. A faulty generalization is thus produced.

Red herring fallacies[edit]

A red herring fallacy, one of the main subtypes of fallacies of relevance, is an error in logic where a proposition is, or is intended to be, misleading in order to make irrelevant or false inferences. In the general case any logical inference based on fake arguments, intended to replace the lack of real arguments or to replace implicitly the subject of the discussion.[63][64][65]

"Red herring – argument given in response to another argument, which is irrelevant and draws attention away from the subject of argument. See also "irrelevant conclusion.

Conditional or questionable fallacies[edit]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Notes
  1. ^ a b "Pirie, Madsen (2006). How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic. A&C Black. p. 46. "ISBN "978-0-8264-9006-3. Retrieved 10 September 2015. 
  2. ^ "fallacy". Encyclopedia Brittanica. Encyclopedia Brittanica. Retrieved 13 June 2017. 
  3. ^ Hornby, A.S. (2010). Oxford advanced learner's dictionary of current English (8th ed.). Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press. "ISBN "978-0194799003. sophist 
  4. ^ Bunnin & Yu 2004, "formal fallacy".
  5. ^ Leon, Joseph (23 April 2011). "Appeal to Probability". Logical & Critical Thinking. Archived from the original on 27 September 2013. 
  6. ^ McDonald, Simon (2009). "Appeal to probability". Toolkit For Thinking. Archived from the original on 19 February 2015. 
  7. ^ Curtis, "Fallacy Fallacy".
  8. ^ "Base Rate Fallacy". Psychology Glossary. AlleyDog.com. Retrieved 2011-02-01. 
  9. ^ Straker, David. "Conjunction Fallacy". ChangingMinds.org. Retrieved 2011-02-01. 
  10. ^ Curtis, "The Masked Man Fallacy".
  11. ^ a b c Wilson 1999, p. 316.
  12. ^ a b c d e f Wilson 1999, p. 317.
  13. ^ Pirie 2006, pp. 133–36.
  14. ^ Wilson 1999, pp. 316–17.
  15. ^ Bennett, Bo. "Modal (Scope) Fallacy". Logically Fallacious. Retrieved 26 August 2017. 
  16. ^ Bunnin & Yu 2004, "informal fallacy".
  17. ^ "Johnson's Refutation of Berkeley: Kicking the Stone Again". "JSTOR 2709600. 
  18. ^ Damer 2009, p. 165.
  19. ^ "Toolkit for Thinking". 
  20. ^ "Repetition". changingminds.org. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  21. ^ "Ad nauseam – Toolkit For Thinking". toolkitforthinking.com. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  22. ^ "Argument from silence – Toolkit For Thinking". toolkitforthinking.com. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  23. ^ Bo Bennett. "Argument from Silence". logicallyfallacious.com. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  24. ^ Damer 2009, p. 150.
  25. ^ "Your logical fallacy is begging the question". Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  26. ^ "Fallacy: Begging the Question". nizkor.org. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  27. ^ Bo Bennett. "Begging the Question". logicallyfallacious.com. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  28. ^ "Begging the Question". txstate.edu. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  29. ^ Dowden 2010, "Line-Drawing".
  30. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 41.
  31. ^ Feinberg, Joel (2007). "Psychological Egoism". In Shafer-Landau, Russ. Ethical Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell Philosophy Anthologies. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 193. "ISBN "978-1-4051-3320-3. 
  32. ^ "Carroll, Robert T. "divine fallacy (argument from incredulity)". "The Skeptic's Dictionary. Retrieved 5 April 2013. 
  33. ^ Damer 2009, p. 121.
  34. ^ Copi & Cohen 1990, p. 206.
  35. ^ Fischer 1970, p. 119.
  36. ^ Gula 2002, p. 70.
  37. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 31.
  38. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 53.
  39. ^ Gula 2002, p. 97.
  40. ^ "Fallacy – False Dilemma". Nizkor. The Nizkor Project. Retrieved 2011-02-01. 
  41. ^ Damer 2009, p. 178.
  42. ^ Damer 2009, p. 186.
  43. ^ Fischer 1970, p. 209.
  44. ^ "The Reflex Arc Concept in Psychology", John Dewey, The Psychological Review, Vol. III. No. 4. July 1896. p. 367
  45. ^ Bunnin & Yu 2004, "Homunculus".
  46. ^ a b "A List Of Fallacious Arguments". Retrieved 6 October 2012. 
  47. ^ "Wimsatt, William K. and "Monroe C. Beardsley. "The Intentional Fallacy." "Sewanee Review, vol. 54 (1946): 468–88. Revised and republished in The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry, U of Kentucky P, 1954: 3–18.
  48. ^ Copi & Cohen 1990, p. 105.
  49. ^ Taleb, Nassim (2007). The Black Swan. Random House. p. 309. "ISBN "1-4000-6351-5. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  50. ^ "TheFreeDictionary". Naturalistic fallacy .
  51. ^ John Searle, "How to Derive 'Ought' from 'Is'", The Philosophical Review, 73:1 (January 1964), 43–58
  52. ^ Alex Walter, "The Anti-naturalistic Fallacy: Evolutionary Moral Psychology and the Insistence of Brute Facts", Evolutionary Psychology, 4 (2006), 33–48
  53. ^ Damer 2009, p. 180.
  54. ^ Damer 2009, p. 208.
  55. ^ Semiotics Glossary R, Referential fallacy or illusion
  56. ^ Gula 2002, p. 135.
  57. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 5.
  58. ^ Flew 1984, "No-true-Scotsman move".
  59. ^ Hurley 2007, p. 155.
  60. ^ Damer 2009, p. 151.
  61. ^ Hurley 2007, p. 134.
  62. ^ Fischer 1970, p. 127.
  63. ^ Gary Curtis. "Logical Fallacy: Red Herring". fallacyfiles.org. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  64. ^ joseph (April 17, 2011). "Red Herring Fallacy". Archived from the original on 2014-12-03. 
  65. ^ "Logical Fallacies". logicalfallacies.info. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  66. ^ Walton 2008, p. 187.
  67. ^ Bo Bennett. "Ad Hominem (Abusive)". logicallyfallacious.com. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  68. ^ Clark & Clark 2005, pp. 13–16.
  69. ^ Walton 1997, p. 28.
  70. ^ Bo Bennett. "Appeal to Accomplishment". logicallyfallacious.com. Retrieved 2016-02-24. 
  71. ^ Walton 2008, p. 27.
  72. ^ Damer 2009, p. 111.
  73. ^ Bo Bennett. "Appeal to Fear". logicallyfallacious.com. 
  74. ^ "Appeal to Fear". changingminds.org. 
  75. ^ Gula 2002, p. 12.
  76. ^ Walton 2008, p. 128.
  77. ^ "Appeal to Ridicule". changingminds.org. 
  78. ^ Bo Bennett. "Appeal to Ridicule". logicallyfallacious.com. 
  79. ^ "Appeal to Spite". changingminds.org. 
  80. ^ Damer 2009, p. 146.
  81. ^ a b Gary Curtis. "Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Nature". fallacyfiles.org. 
  82. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 116.
  83. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 104.
  84. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 14.
  85. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 39.
  86. ^ Damer 2009, p. 106.
  87. ^ "Appeal to Widespread Belief". Retrieved 6 October 2012. 
  88. ^ Gary Curtis. "Logical Fallacy: Guilt by Association". fallacyfiles.org. 
  89. ^ Whitney, William Dwight. (1906). "Ipse dixit", The Century dictionary and cyclopedia, pp. 379–380; Westbrook, Robert B. "John Dewey and American Democracy", p. 359.
  90. ^ VanderMey, Randall et al. (2011). Comp, p. 183; excerpt: "Bare assertion. The most basic way to distort an issue is to deny that it exists. This fallacy claims, 'That's just how it is.' "
  91. ^ "Encyclopedia Barfieldiana". davidlavery.net. 
  92. ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on February 5, 2012. Retrieved February 11, 2014. 
  93. ^ Damer 2009, p. 93.
  94. ^ Shackel, Nicholas (2005). "The Vacuity of Postmodernist Methodology". "Metaphilosophy. 36 (3). For my purposes the desirable but only lightly defensible territory of the "Motte and Bailey castle, that is to say, the Bailey, represents a philosophical doctrine or position with similar properties: desirable to its proponent but only lightly defensible. The Motte is the defensible but undesired position to which one retreats when hard pressed… 
  95. ^ Dowden 2010, "Is-Ought".
  96. ^ Dowden 2010, "Naturalistic".
  97. ^ Munson, Ronald; Black, Andrew (2016). The Elements of Reasoning. Cengage Learning. p. 257. "ISBN "1305886836. 
  98. ^ Walton 2008, p. 22.
  99. ^ Curtis, "The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy".
  100. ^ Pirie 2006, p. 164.
  101. ^ Johnson & Blair 1994, p. 122.
  102. ^ Frankena, W. K. (October 1939). "The Naturalistic Fallacy". Mind. Oxford University Press. 48 (192): 464–77. "JSTOR 2250706. 
  103. ^ Walton 2008, p. 315.
Works

Further reading[edit]

The following is a sample of books for further reading, selected for a combination of content, ease of access via the internet, and to provide an indication of published sources that interested readers may review. The titles of some books are self-explanatory. Good books on critical thinking commonly contain sections on fallacies, and some may be listed below.

External links[edit]

) )