|
|
| Тема |
 Методи на зомбиране |
|
| Автор | мaнипyлaтop (Нерегистриран) | |
| Публикувано | 05.07.05 15:25 |
|
|
|
Fallacies of Distraction
* False Dilemma: two choices are given when in fact there are three options
* From Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
* Slippery Slope: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
* Complex Question: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition
Appeals to Motives in Place of Support
* Appeal to Force: the reader is persuaded to agree by force
* Appeal to Pity: the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy
* Consequences: the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences
* Prejudicial Language: value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author
* Popularity: a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true
Changing the Subject
* Attacking the Person:
o (1) the person's character is attacked
o (2) the person's circumstances are noted
o (3) the person does not practise what is preached
* Appeal to Authority:
o (1) the authority is not an expert in the field
o (2) experts in the field disagree
o (3) the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious
* Anonymous Authority: the authority in question is not named
* Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion
Inductive Fallacies
* Hasty Generalization: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population
* Unrepresentative Sample: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole
* False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
* Slothful Induction: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary
* Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration
Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms
* Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception
* Converse Accident : an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply
Causal Fallacies
* Post Hoc: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
* Joint effect: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause
* Insignificant: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect
* Wrong Direction: the direction between cause and effect is reversed
* Complex Cause: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect
Missing the Point
* Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
* Irrelevant Conclusion: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion
* Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition's best argument
Fallacies of Ambiguity
* Equivocation: the same term is used with two different meanings
* Amphiboly: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
* Accent: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says
Category Errors
* Composition: because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property
* Division: because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property
Non Sequitur
* Affirming the Consequent: any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A
* Denying the Antecedent: any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B
* Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true
Syllogistic Errors
* Fallacy of Four Terms: a syllogism has four terms
* Undistributed Middle: two separate categories are said to be connected because they share a common property
* Illicit Major: the predicate of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the predicate
* Illicit Minor: the subject of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the subject
* Fallacy of Exclusive Premises: a syllogism has two negative premises
* Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise: as the name implies
* Existential Fallacy: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises
Fallacies of Explanation
* Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist)
* Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
* Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested)
* Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
* Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)
Fallacies of Definition
* Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included)
* Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
* Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand than the word or concept being defined)
* Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
* Conflicting Conditions (The definition is self-contradictory)
| |
| |
| 
|
|
