New answers tagged

0

Yes, this has misunderstood the 'recourse to authority' issue. This isn't surprising; the issue is badly understood even among scientists an other authorities. This issue goes all the way back to one of the fundamental worldview changes that began back in the Enlightenment: a shift from a reliance on personal authority to systemic authority. Modern forms of ...


0

Source: Two Kinds of Arguments from Authority in the Ad Verecundiam Fallacy 1 - An argument appealing to an authority can never serve as a deductive inference, that is, it cannot be said that an affirmative argument is automatically correct just because a certain authority on the subject said that the same is true, that is: • Ricardo Felício said that global ...


0

Circular reasoning is merely an extend form of tautology. Instead of saying "A equals A because A equals A" (a simple tautology) we say "A equals B because B equals Q because Q equals 𝚵 because 𝚵 equals A". As long as all these things are actually equal, this reasoning is perfectly valid, if mindlessly trivial. There are two problems ...


1

I would say almost every answerer misunderstood and/or blithely dismissed what you asked. The forms are: A is part of B, because A is part of C. A is terrorists, or raising wage B is cowards, or not Socialist C is evil ones, or things that stop poverty The implied logic is: (A subset of C) and (C subset of B)_implied, therefore (A subset of B). And the error ...


0

What you give as absolute statements are actually quite inaccurate statements. "Lollies are frequently consumed by children" - well, it doesn't say that all types of lollies are frequently consumed by children, at that's where the argument breaks apart. You can only apply logic to real world situations if the statements you use describe the real ...


1

This tendency (to value complexity, appearance of complexity) also impacts problem solving. It's pretty well understood by test makers that you can divert (many) weaker subjects from what they would figure out as a right answer with "red herrings". Whereas if they only had the key parts, they would (tend to) figure out the answer.


33

If somebody said "your argument is simple, therefore it is wrong", that would definitely be a fallacy. But that is not what "your argument is too simplistic" is supposed to mean. Consider the following two exchanges. Wally says "the economy is in recession, so the government are bad at economics". Clive says "that's too ...


23

This is the complexity bias. See also the conjunction fallacy. It's not necessarily always a fallacy to prefer complicated explanations; someone who studies a subject deeply is likely to produce a more complex explanation when necessary. But as a consequence of that, someone who would like to be seen as an expert, whether or not they are one, is also likely ...


Top 50 recent answers are included