|
False Equivalence
False equivalence is an informal fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency. Colloquially, a false equivalence is often called "comparing apples and oranges." Characteristics This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence does not bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: In an even more fallacious version, "d" is not required to exist in both sets; merely a similarity of two items in set and in set is cited to assert equivalence among the sets. Example: Examples The following statement ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Argument To Moderation
Argument to moderation ( la, argumentum ad temperantiam)—also known as false compromise, argument from middle ground, and the golden mean fallacy , The Nizkor Project (accessed 29 November 2012)—is the that the is supposedly always a compromise between two opposing positions. An example would be to regard two opposed arguments, with one person (correctly) saying that the sky is blue and another saying that the sky is in fact yellow, and incorrectly conclude that the sky is the intermediate colour of green. See also * |
Heroin
Heroin, also known as diacetylmorphine and diamorphine among other names, is a potent opioid mainly used as a recreational drug for its euphoric effects. Medical grade diamorphine is used as a pure hydrochloride salt. Various white and brown powders sold illegally around the world as heroin have variable "cuts". Black tar heroin is a variable admixture of morphine derivatives—predominantly 6-MAM (6-monoacetylmorphine), which is the result of crude acetylation during clandestine production of street heroin. Heroin is used medically in several countries to relieve pain, such as during childbirth or a heart attack, as well as in opioid replacement therapy. It is typically injected, usually into a vein, but it can also be smoked, snorted, or inhaled. In a clinical context, the route of administration is most commonly intravenous injection; it may also be given by intramuscular or subcutaneous injection, as well as orally in the form of tablets. The onset of effects is usuall ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Wronger Than Wrong
Wronger than wrong is a statement that equates two errors when one of the errors is clearly more wrong than the other. It was described by Michael Shermer as Asimov's axiom. The mistake was discussed in Isaac Asimov's book of essays ''The Relativity of Wrong'' as well as in a 1989 article of the same name in the Fall 1989 issue of the ''Skeptical Inquirer'': Asimov explained that science is both progressive and cumulative. Even though scientific theories are later proven wrong, the degree of their wrongness attenuates with time as they are modified in response to the mistakes of the past. For example, data collected from satellite measurements show, to a high level of precision, how the Earth's shape differs from a perfect sphere or even an oblate spheroid or a geoid. Shermer stated that being wronger than wrong is actually worse than being ''not even wrong'' (that is, being unfalsifiable). According to John Jenkins, who reviewed ''The Relativity of Wrong'', the title essay o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Whataboutism
Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument. The communication intent here is often to distract from the content of a topic (red herring). The goal may also be to question the justification for criticism, the legitimacy, integrity, and fairness of the critic, which can take on the character of discrediting the criticism, which may or may not be justified. Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one's own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: "Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany." B: "And what about the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Tu Quoque
(; Latin , for "you also") is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of attack. The cites John Cooke's 1614 stage play as the earliest use of the term in the English language. "Whataboutism" is one particularly well known modern instance of this technique. Form and explanation The (fallacious) argument follows the template (i.e. pattern): # Person A claims that statement is true. # Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim . # Therefore, is false. As a specific example, consider the following scenario where Person A and Person B just left a store. #Person A: "You took that item without paying for it. What you did is morally wrong!" #*Here, is the statement: "Stealing from a store is morally wrong." Person A is ass ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
List Of Fallacies
A fallacy is reasoning that is logically invalid, or that undermines the logical validity of an argument. All forms of human communication can contain fallacies. Because of their variety, fallacies are challenging to classify. They can be classified by their structure ( formal fallacies) or content (informal fallacies). Informal fallacies, the larger group, may then be subdivided into categories such as improper presumption, faulty generalization, and error in assigning causation and relevance, among others. The use of fallacies is common when the speaker's goal of achieving common agreement is more important to them than utilizing sound reasoning. When fallacies are used, the premise should be recognized as not well-grounded, the conclusion as unproven (but not necessarily false), and the argument as unsound. Formal fallacies A formal fallacy is an error in the argument's form. All formal fallacies are types of . * Appeal to probability – a statement that takes something ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
False Analogy
Argument from analogy or false analogy is a special type of inductive argument, whereby perceived similarities are used as a basis to infer some further similarity that has yet to be observed. Analogical reasoning is one of the most common methods by which human beings attempt to understand the world and make decisions. When a person has a bad experience with a product and decides not to buy anything further from the producer, this is often a case of analogical reasoning. It is also implicit in much of science; for instance, experiments on laboratory rats typically proceed on the basis that some physiological similarities between rats and humans entails some further similarity (e.g. possible reactions to a drug). Structure The process of analogical inference involves noting the shared properties of two or more things, and from this basis inferring that they also share some further property. The structure or form may be generalized like so: : P and Q are similar in respect t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
False Balance
False balance, also bothsidesism, is a media bias in which journalists present an issue as being more balanced between opposing viewpoints than the evidence supports. Journalists may present evidence and arguments out of proportion to the actual evidence for each side, or may omit information that would establish one side's claims as baseless. False balance has been cited as a cause of misinformation. False balance is a bias which usually stems from an attempt to avoid bias and gives unsupported or dubious positions an illusion of respectability. It creates a public perception that some issues are scientifically contentious, though in reality they may not be, therefore creating doubt about the scientific state of research, and can be exploited by interest groups such as corporations like the fossil fuel industry or the tobacco industry, or ideologically motivated activists such as vaccination opponents or creationists. Examples of false balance in reporting on science issues ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Equivocation
In logic, equivocation ("calling two different things by the same name") is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses within an argument. It is a type of ambiguity that stems from a phrase having two or more distinct meanings, not from the grammar or structure of the sentence. Fallacy of four terms Equivocation in a syllogism (a chain of reasoning) produces a fallacy of four terms (). Below are some examples: : Since only man umanis rational. : And no woman is a man ale : Therefore, no woman is rational. The first instance of "man" implies the entire human species, while the second implies just those who are male. : A feather is light ot heavy : What is light rightcannot be dark. : Therefore, a feather cannot be dark. In the above example, distinct meanings of the word "light" are implied in contexts of the first and second statements. : All jackasses ale donkeyhave long ears. : Carl is a jackass nnoying person : There ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Apophenia
Apophenia () is the tendency to perceive meaningful connections between unrelated things. The term (German: ' from the Greek verb ''ἀποφαίνειν'' (apophaínein)) was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia. He defined it as "unmotivated seeing of connections ccompanied bya specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness". He described the early stages of delusional thought as self-referential over-interpretations of actual sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. Apophenia has also come to describe a human propensity to unreasonably seek patterns in random information, such as can occur while gambling. Introduction Apophenia can be considered a commonplace effect of brain function. Taken to an extreme, however, it can be a symptom of psychiatric dysfunction, for example, as a symptom in paranoid schizophrenia, where a patient sees hostile patterns (for example, a conspiracy to persecute them) in ordin ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Affirming The Consequent
Affirming the consequent, sometimes called converse error, fallacy of the converse, or confusion of necessity and sufficiency, is a formal fallacy of taking a true conditional statement (e.g., "If the lamp were broken, then the room would be dark"), and invalidly inferring its converse ("The room is dark, so the lamp is broken"), even though that statement may not be true. This arises when a consequent ("the room would be dark") has other possible antecedents (for example, "the lamp is in working order, but is switched off" or "there is no lamp in the room"). Converse errors are common in everyday thinking and communication and can result from, among other causes, communication issues, misconceptions about logic, and failure to consider other causes. The opposite statement, denying the consequent, ''is'' a valid form of argument (modus tollens). Formal description Affirming the consequent is the action of taking a true statement P \to Q and invalidly concluding its converse Q \ ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
2016 United States Presidential Election
The 2016 United States presidential election was the 58th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. The Republican ticket of businessman Donald Trump and Indiana governor Mike Pence defeated the Democratic ticket of former secretary of state and First Lady of the United States Hillary Clinton and the United States senator from Virginia Tim Kaine, in what was considered a large upset. Trump took office as the 45th president, and Pence as the 48th vice president, on January 20, 2017. It was the fifth and most recent presidential election in which the winning candidate lost the popular vote. It was also the sixth presidential election, and the first since 1944, in which both major party candidates were registered in the same home state. Per the Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution, then-incumbent president Barack Obama was ineligible to seek a third term. Clinton defeated self-described democratic socialist Senator Ber ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
