A Dialogue Concerning Oratorical Partitions(c. 50 BC)
De Optimo Genere Oratorum(46 BC)
Orator(46 BC)
On the Sublime(c. 50)
Institutio Oratoria(95)
Panegyrici Latini(100–400)
Dialogus de oratoribus(102)
De doctrina Christiana(426)
De vulgari eloquentia(1305)
Copia: Foundations of the Abundant Style(1521)
Language as Symbolic Action(1966)
A General Rhetoric(1970)
Subfields
Argumentation
Cognitive
Contrastive
Constitutive
Digital
Feminist
Native American
New
Health and medicine
Pedagogy
Procedural
Science
Technology
Therapy
Visual
Composition
Related
Ars dictaminis
Communication studies
Composition studies
Doxa
Glossary of rhetorical terms
Glossophobia
List of feminist rhetoricians
List of speeches
Oral skills
Orator
Pistis
Public rhetoric
Rhetoric of social intervention model
Rhetrickery
Rogerian argument
Seduction
Speechwriting
Talking point
TED
Terministic screen
Toulmin model
Wooden iron
v
t
e
Informal fallacies are a type of incorrect argument in natural language. The source of the error is not just due to the form of the argument, as is the case for formal fallacies, but can also be due to their content and context. Fallacies, despite being incorrect, usually appear to be correct and thereby can seduce people into accepting and using them. These misleading appearances are often connected to various aspects of natural language, such as ambiguous or vague expressions, or the assumption of implicit premises instead of making them explicit.
Traditionally, a great number of informal fallacies have been identified, including the fallacy of equivocation, the fallacy of amphiboly, the fallacies of composition and division, the false dilemma, the fallacy of begging the question, the ad hominem fallacy and the appeal to ignorance. There is no general agreement as to how the various fallacies are to be grouped into categories. One approach sometimes found in the literature is to distinguish between fallacies of ambiguity, which have their root in ambiguous or vague language, fallacies of presumption, which involve false or unjustified premises, and fallacies of relevance, in which the premises are not relevant to the conclusion despite appearances otherwise.
The traditional approach to fallacies has received a lot of criticism in contemporary philosophy. This criticism is often based on the argument that the alleged fallacies are not fallacious at all, or at least not in all cases. To overcome this problem, alternative approaches for conceiving arguments and fallacies have been proposed. These include the dialogical approach, which conceives arguments as moves in a dialogue-game aimed at rationally persuading the other person. This game is governed by various rules. Fallacies are defined as violations of the dialogue rules impeding the progress of the dialogue. The epistemic approach constitutes another framework. Its core idea is that arguments play an epistemic role: they aim to expand our knowledge by providing a bridge from already justified beliefs to not yet justified beliefs. Fallacies are arguments that fall short of this goal by breaking a rule of epistemic justification. In the Bayesian approach, the epistemic norms are given by the laws of probability, which our degrees of belief should track.
The study of fallacies aims at providing an account for evaluating and criticizing arguments. This involves both a descriptive account of what constitutes an argument and a normative account of which arguments are good or bad.[1][2] In philosophy, fallacies are usually seen as a form of bad argument and are discussed as such in this article. Another conception, more common in non-scholarly discourse, sees fallacies not as arguments but rather as false yet popular beliefs.[3]
^Cite error: The named reference Walton was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^Cite error: The named reference Siegel was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^Cite error: The named reference Hansen was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Informalfallacies are a type of incorrect argument in natural language. The source of the error is not just due to the form of the argument, as is the...
classified by their structure (formal fallacies) or content (informalfallacies). Informalfallacies, the larger group, may then be subdivided into categories...
while an informalfallacy originates in an error in reasoning other than an improper logical form. Arguments containing informalfallacies may be formally...
false binary, is an informalfallacy based on a premise that erroneously limits what options are available. The source of the fallacy lies not in an invalid...
In logic and philosophy, a formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (/ˌnɒn ˈsɛkwɪtər/; Latin for 'it does not follow') is a...
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informalfallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion,...
question or assuming the conclusion (Latin: petītiō principiī) is an informalfallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion...
A faulty generalization is an informalfallacy wherein a conclusion is drawn about all or many instances of a phenomenon on the basis of one or a few instances...
The fallacy of composition is an informalfallacy that arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some...
The nirvana fallacy is the informalfallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives. It can also refer to the tendency to...
propter hoc (Latin: 'after this, therefore because of this') is an informalfallacy that states: "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been...
No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informalfallacy in which one attempts to protect an a posteriori claim from a falsifying counterexample by...
hounds from chasing a rabbit. As an informalfallacy, the red herring falls into a broad class of relevance fallacies. Unlike the straw man, which involves...
practice and what others were doing in their informal logic texts. Informal logic is associated with informalfallacies, critical thinking, the thinking skills...
equivocation ("calling two different things by the same name") is an informalfallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple...
The Texas sharpshooter fallacy is an informalfallacy which is committed when differences in data are ignored, but similarities are overemphasized. From...
categorized among informalfallacies, more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance. Ad hominem fallacies can be separated...
elenchi (Latin for 'ignoring refutation') or missing the point, is the informalfallacy of presenting an argument whose conclusion fails to address the issue...
The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue) is a fallacy of irrelevance in which arguments or information are dismissed...
this is called the slippery slope fallacy. This is a type of informalfallacy, and is a subset of continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility...
arguments alone, independent of their topic and content. Informal logic is associated with informalfallacies, critical thinking, and argumentation theory. It...
called fallacies. For formal fallacies, like affirming the consequent, the error lies in the logical form of the argument. For informalfallacies, like...
fallacy. Specifically, it is an informalfallacy, which means that it relies on inductive reasoning in an argument to justify an assertion. Informal fallacies...
The regression (or regressive) fallacy is an informalfallacy. It assumes that something has returned to normal because of corrective actions taken while...
'agreement of the people') Argumentum ad populum is a type of informalfallacy, specifically a fallacy of relevance, and is similar to an argument from authority...
Global Information