New answers tagged fallacies
0
No logical fallacy, but as stated an Informal Fallacy would be "Tu Quoque"
Basically a form of 'ad hominem', where instead of criticizing the argument, you are criticizing the person doing the argument.
Being a hypocrite does not discredit the value of the argument. Nor being the devil for that matter.
0
No, there is no logical fallacy. The fallacy is rather that politic discussions probably never proceed a strict logical line.
The circumstance that country A critizes a misbehaviour of country B that A made by itself in the past, could be used by A to argue, if country A at least ever admitted that it made that mistake.
So A could at least demand B to admit ...
0
Just to show how this homework can be approached:
After slicing a Golden Glow orange, Nancy discovers that it is rotten. “I’ll never buy another Golden Glow product,” she declares emphatically.
A major logical problem (in my opinion) with Nancies reaction is that she believes something about all Golden Glow products (oranges?) based on a single observation....
0
It's not a fallacy, because it's not a logical proof.
The point of comedy isn't to prove or disprove something using logical rigour, it's to entertain - and, in as close as it comes to the point of the question - to make the audience think about something they may have never questioned.
There's no question that there's a long history of racism, sexism, ...
0
This is called "cherry picking," or anyhow, nebulously, "suppressed evidence." Cicero conveys to us a witty occasion of Diagoras of Melos pointing to the fallacy (to my knowledge, the earliest record of it) in his De Natura Deorum (III.89)
Diagoras, named the Atheist, once came to Samothrace, and a certain
friend said to him, "You ...
1
I think all four of your models seem to miss the mark for me. (haha) A consideration which I'd like to introduce here is that there isn't anything in the fallacy that hinges on whether or not the conclusions we draw are true or confirmed by the data; merely that those conclusions are methodologically suspect
Let's start by digging into the "Sharpshooter", ...
0
The fallacy is about picking a "target" in retrospect after one already has the data (akin to drawing a target against the tightest cluster of bullet holes on the barn after one has already shot the gun to create them) and then calculating the probability that the data would all be so close to the target in the same way one would if the target had been ...
0
It does not have to be a fallacy. In relative morality, each rational agent needs to justify his motives. And the judgement can also be based on personal experience.
Since relative morality is relative, rational agents in a society do not necessarily agree on consensus morals. If such agent debate morality of certain actions, it can be to philosophically ...
3
This is called appeal to emotion, argumentum ad passiones: "manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence". In other words, dispassionate reasoning (in this case, about rape) is replaced with evoking sentiment. The underlying device of "making it personal" is also at the root of many ad ...
Top 50 recent answers are included
