-Caveat Lector-

Table of Contents
http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm

Welcome

How To Use This Guide  >>>Go to the site and use hot linques for each
major subject / title<<<

Table of Contents

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:

the person's character is attacked
the person's circumstances are noted
the person does not practise what is preached

Appeal to Authority:

the authority is not an expert in the field
experts in the field disagree
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)

Logic Resources

References

For Educators

Copyright Notice

What's New

Awards

Author

Stephen Downes' Homepage
Email Stephen



For Educators
Stephen Downes Guide to the Logical Fallacies
Copyright © Stephen Downes, 1995-2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to