Appeal To Accomplishment

	Appeal To Accomplishment Appeal to accomplishment is a genetic fallacy wherein Person A challenges a thesis put forward by Person B because Person B has not accomplished similar feats or accomplished as many feats as Person C or Person A. The reverse, appealing to the fact that no one has the proper experience in question and thus cannot prove something is impossible, is a version of an argument from silence. Appeal to accomplishment is a form of appeal to authority, which is a well-known logical fallacy In philosophy, a formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (; Latin for " tdoes not follow") is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure that can neatly be expressed in a standard logic syst .... Some consider that it can be used in a cogent form when all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context. Examples "How dare you criticize the prime minister? What do you know about running an entire country?" " ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu]
	Genetic Fallacy The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue) is a fallacy of irrelevance in which arguments or information are dismissed or validated based solely on their source of origin rather than their content. In other words, a claim is ignored or given credibility based on its source rather than the claim itself. The fallacy therefore fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question. Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits. In ''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy'' (1995) it is asserted that the term originated in Morris Raphael Cohen and Ernest Nagel's book ''Logic and Scientific Method'' (1934). However, in a book review published in ''The Nation'' in 1926, Mortimer J. Adler complained that ''The St ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu]
picture info	Argument From Silence To make an argument from silence (Latin: ''argumentum ex silentio'') is to express a conclusion that is based on the absence of statements in historical documents, rather than their presence.John Lange, ''The Argument from Silence'', History and Theory, Vol. 5, No. 3 (1966), pp. 288–30/ref> In the field of classical studies, it often refers to the assertion that an author is ignorant of a subject, based on the lack of references to it in the author's available writings. Thus in historical analysis with an argument from silence, the absence of a reference to an event or a document is used to cast doubt on the event not mentioned. While most historical approaches rely on what an author's works contain, an argument from silence relies on what the book or document does not contain. This approach thus uses what an author "should have said" rather than what is available in the author's extant writings.''Seven Pillories of Wisdom'' by David R. Hall 1991 pp. 55–56.''Histori ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu]
	Appeal To Authority An argument from authority (''argumentum ab auctoritate''), also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority on a topic is used as evidence to support an argument. Some consider that it is used in a cogent form if all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context, and others consider it to be a fallacy to cite the views of an authority on the discussed topic as a means of supporting an argument. Overview Historically, opinion on the appeal to authority has been divided: it is listed as a non-fallacious argument as often as a fallacious argument in various sources, as some hold that it can be a strong or at least valid defeasible argument and others that it is weak or an outright fallacy. The general form of this type of argument is: Use in science Scientific knowledge is best established by evidence and experiment rather than argued through authority as authorit ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu]
picture info	Logical Fallacy In philosophy, a formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (; Latin for " tdoes not follow") is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure that can neatly be expressed in a standard logic system, for example propositional logic.Harry J. Gensler, ''The A to Z of Logic'' (2010) p. 74. Rowman & Littlefield, It is defined as a deductive argument that is invalid. The argument itself could have true premises, but still have a false conclusion. Thus, a formal fallacy is a fallacy where deduction goes wrong, and is no longer a logical process. This may not affect the truth of the conclusion, since validity and truth are separate in formal logic. While a logical argument is a non sequitur if, and only if, it is invalid, the term "non sequitur" typically refers to those types of invalid arguments which do not constitute formal fallacies covered by particular terms (e.g., affirming the consequent). In other words, in practice, "''non s ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu]