Term
|
Definition
A Flawed or defective argument that may still be persuasive and even convincing. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A fallacy of relevence whereby the claimant shifts the focus away from the supporting reasons to the potential negative consequences fro the claimant. Some appeals the emotion (including pit) can be legitimate, but many are not; context is the crucial factor |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A formally invalid pattern of reasoning that takes this form
If A, Then B
B (Affirming the consequent)
Therefore, A |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A formally invalid pattern that takes this form
If A, Then B
Not A (denying the antecedent)
Therefore, not B |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A form of reasoning that is fallacious if the claimant strays outside his or her area(s) of expertise; it is perfectly acceptable if the claimant actually is an authority in the area in question. |
|
|
Term
| Appeal to popular opinion |
|
Definition
| A fallacy of relevance whereby, even if everyone believes X to be true, this in no way guarantee that X is true or that it is reasonable to believe that X is true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A fallacy of reveleance whereby claimants are personally attacked, rather than having supporting reasons for their claim called into question. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A fallacy of relevance whereby person A, who has been accused of being guilty of X by person B, responds by claiming that person B is even worse with respect to X than A is. Perosn A completely ignores whether he or she is actually guilty of X |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A fallacy of relevance whereby someone threatens force (physical, economic, Political) if the other person does not agree with his or her view on a particular matter. Such an approach completely ignores the reasons offered in support of the claim in question. |
|
|
