New answers tagged

0

Have you seen the video Shapiro's Excluded Middle? I don't think it includes any actual footage of Ben Shapiro talking. However, it gives some specific examples, with quite a bit of detail.


1

A cognitive bias is a psychological predisposition to error, where as formal and informal fallacies are logical errors arising from structural flaws in reasoning and generally arise from formal deficiencies or violations of principles, though they overlap to a certain extent. Informal fallacies usually rely on cognitive bias (think appeal to emotion, for ...


0

In boolean logic, there's something called the Contraposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition If you consider the statement "if X then Y" (X -> Y), there exists some opposite of the statement. One common flaw while inverting conditional statements is not correctly calculating the contraposition. The mistake is introduced inverting the left ...


-1

Your example is not quite clear. Patient: “That’s ridiculous! You always told me that brushing my teeth prevents cavities. I brush my teeth every night. Therefore, I can’t possibly have cavities.” If we take "X prevents Y" to mean "if X, then not Y", and if the dentist did in fact say that brushing prevents cavities, and the patient did in fact brush ...


5

The patient has confused necessary and sufficient conditions. Brushing one's teeth is necessary for good dental health, but is not sufficient to guarantee that outcome.


2

What do you call the fallacy of thinking that some action A will guarantee some outcome B, when in reality B depends on multiple other conditions? I agree with Conifold, possibly with a better explanation. Faulty relevance logic, it suffers in many respects and lacks critical thinking and rationality. A false consensus effect causes them to question the ...


4

Your example is not well-suited to your question, or vice versa. In your example, the patient (as @Barmar notes) has misunderstood the claims about brushing one's teeth. A better example might be (grimly) lung cancer, where the patient's line is "(A)Smoking causes lung cancer, (B)I don't smoke, therefore (C)I can't have lung cancer". Obviously, it's possible ...


28

What do you call the fallacy of thinking that if A statistically causes B, then A implies B? For the original title quoted above, the closest is probably correlation implies causation, deducing a cause-and-effect relationship solely on the basis of an observed statistical correlation. The Latin name is cum hoc ergo propter hoc (with this, therefore because ...


3

It's a straw man argument: where you change an argument someone's made to make it weaker than it is, and then refute it as if it were the other person's argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


1

A fallacy is argument built from premises that are irrelevant, unacceptable, or otherwise fail to provide the grounds for the conclusion. You argument can be rewritten: P1: If something is more than something else, it is only that something. P2: The sea is more blue than the sky. C: So the sea is just blue. It certainly is a fallacy, but I'd ...


0

Yes, given the text, the third statement is ad hominem. A fallacy is determined by three criteria according to T. Edward Damer in Attacking Faulty Reasoning. A fallacy is an argument which attempts to show truth by using irrelevant claims, unacceptable claims, or providing an inadequate grounds for drawing an inference. An ad hominem in particular is ...


0

Consider the following response by Person A: Person A: It's not my fault you don't have common sense or any idea of being a functioning person in society. This does not appear to be relevant to the argument about the role of common sense in socially acceptable behavior. Indeed it appears to be an abusive ad hominem attack desiring to shift burden of ...


0

All three statements have problems: The first is almost tautological. Common sense is what the common man would, without other influences, observe and conclude, which is exactly how socially acceptable is determined. The second statement might be true for "obvious", but not for "common sense". Individuals can see things differently, and if that is very ...


1

One place to look for arguments similar to the paradox of tolerance is "slippery slope" arguments. Douglas Walton offers four identifying characteristics of slippery slope arguments: One is a first step, an action or policy being considered. A second is a sequence in which this action leads to other actions. A third is a so-called gray zone or area of ...


Top 50 recent answers are included