Fallacy Arguments

Understanding fallacy arguments requires examining multiple perspectives and considerations. Fallacies (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Two competing conceptions of fallacies are that they are false but popular beliefs and that they are deceptively bad arguments. These we may distinguish as the belief and argument conceptions of fallacies. Moreover, argument and Argumentation - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Furthermore, one of the most extensively studied types of arguments throughout the centuries are, perhaps surprisingly, arguments that appear legitimate but are not, known as fallacious arguments.

In this context, informal Logic - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Some fallacies — e.g., equivocation and begging the question (i.e. circular reasoning) — highlight important issues that frequently interfere with real life arguing, but fallacy theory has been criticized when it is adopted as a general account of argument.

Notes to Fallacies 1. In this context, a similar inventory of fallacies has been dubbed “the gang of eighteen” by John Woods (1992). Meditations on First Philosophy, Dedication. ‘Deduction’ has replaced ‘syllogism’ as the way to translate ‘sullogismos’.

See Corcoran (1974), Smith (1997), and Irwin and Fine (1996). Teleological Arguments for God’s Existence - Stanford Encyclopedia of .... The resultant theistic arguments, in their various logical forms, share a focus on plan, purpose, intention, and design, and are thus classified as teleological arguments (or, frequently, as arguments from or to design). Another key aspect involves, in assessing ordinary arguments, these issues can be avoided by understanding fallacies more simply, as common patterns of faulty reasoning which can usefully be identified in the evaluation of informal arguments. Sorites Paradox - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Maybe someone will say that even after the correct diagnosis of the puzzle has been discovered, the argument will remain a paradox because it will still appear to consist in unimpeachable reasoning from true premises to a false conclusion. Infinite Regress Arguments - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. An infinite regress argument is an argument that makes appeal to an infinite regress.

Usually such arguments take the form of objections to a theory, with the fact that the theory implies an infinite regress being taken to be objectionable. Argument and Argumentation > Historical Supplement: Argumentation in .... A key concept introduced by Aristotle in the Sophistical Refutations is that of fallacies, i.e., arguments that appear correct but are ultimately incorrect, thus leading to faulty conclusions (see entry on fallacies). Analogy and Analogical Reasoning - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. In general (but not always), such arguments belong in the category of ampliative reasoning, since their conclusions do not follow with certainty but are only supported with varying degrees of strength.

However, the proper characterization of analogical arguments is subject to debate (see §2.2).