PHILO - Fallacies

when someone refutes an argument by attacking person making the argument

someone who attacks a position the opponent doesn't really hold

assers that a proposition is ture because it has not yet been proven to be false

limiting the options to two when there are in fact more options to choose from

suggests unlikely outcomes when there's justs not enough evidence to think so

repeating what they already assumed beforehand, and not arriving at any new conclusion

drawing a conclusion based on a small sample size

a distraction from the argument typically with some sentiment that seems to be relevant but isn't really on-topic

refusing an argument by showing that the speaker himself is guilty of it

any logical breakdown when identifying a cause

We are susceptible to this errant behaviour when we crave that sense of completion or accomplishment

this happens when we misuse an authority

one meaning in one premise and another meaning in another premise

appeals to the compassion and emotional sensitivity of others when these factors are not strictly relevant to the argument

the fallacy of attempting to win popular assent to a conclusion by arousing the feeling and enthusiasm of the multitude

when force, coercion, or even a threat, is used in place of a reason in an attempt to justify a conclusion

is a process whereby from the truth-value of the one or more propsoitions, we conclue to the truth-value of another propositon

a type of inference that proceeds from one prosoition directly to another proposition

a type of inference that proceeds from two or more propositions to another which is implied in the given propositions

refers to the terms and propositions that are used

refers to the order of specific arrangement of the terms and propositions in the reference

inferences from which the conclusion is derived

the new truth that is attained which necessarily follows from the premises

a discourse which proves something (conclusion) on the basis of certain facts or propositions (premises)

refers to the truth of the proposition

refers to the logical connection among the propositions such that one proposition (the conclusion) follows necessarily from the other propositions (premises)

proceeds from a more universal truth to a less universal truth

proceeds from a sufficient number of particular truths to auniversal truth

an argument which proceeds from statements concerning the relationship of two terms to a third term, to a conclusion

the different arrangements of each figure or the specific combination of the proposition that make up a syllogism

is an error in inferences that renders ana rgument invalid