Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Crit Th Ch 3
Hurley's Concise Introduction to Logic: Chapter 3 Vovaculary
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| fallacy | a defect in an argument that consists in something other than false premises alone |
| formal fallacy | one that may be identified by merely examining the form or structure of an argument |
| informal fallacy | those that can be detected only by examining the content of the argument |
| fallacies of relevance | the argument in which they occur have premises that are logically irrelevant to the conclusion |
| appeal to force | a fallacy of relevance that occurs whenever an arguer poses a conclusion to another person and tells that person that some harm will occur to them if they do not accept the conclusion |
| appeal to pity | a fallacy of relevance that occurs when an arguer attempts to support a conclusion by merely evoking pity from the reader or listener |
| appeal to the people | a fallacy of relevance that uses desires to het the reader or listener to accept the conclusion |
| direct approach (appeal to the people) | when an arguer, addressing a large group of people, excites emotions and enthusiasm to win acceptance for his or her conclusion |
| indirect approach (appeal to the people) | arguer aims his or her appeal not at the crowd as a whole but at one or more individuals separately |
| bandwagon argument | a fallacy of relevance that is also an appeal to the people in which the argument seeks to suggest that you will be left behind or left out of the group if you do not do a certain thing |
| appeal to vanity | a fallacy of relavance and an appeal to the people that associates a product with someone who is admired, pursued, or imitated, the idea being that you too with be admired if you use it |
| appeal to snobbery | a fallacy of relavance and appeal to the people that evokes an immediate feeling of belonging |
| argument against the person | when a responsive argument directs attention to the opposing arguer himself instead of the argument |
| ad hominem abusive | a response in which the argument involves verbally abusing the opposing arguer |
| ad hominem circumstantial | instead of verbal abuse, the respondent attempts to discredit the opponent's argument by alluding to certain circumstances that affect the opponent |
| tu quoque | the second arguer attempt to make the first appear to be hypocritical |
| accident | a fallacy of relevance that is committed when a general rule is applied to a specific case it was not intended to cover. |
| straw man | a fallacy of relevance that is committed when an arguer distorts an opponent's argument for the purpose of more easily attacking it, demolishes the distorted argument, and then concludes the opponent's real argument has been demolished |
| missing the point | a fallacy of relevance that is committed when the premises of the argument support one particular conclusion, but then a different conclusion is drawn |
| red herring | a fallacy of relavance that is committed when the arguer diverts the attention of the reader or listener by changing the subject to a different but sometimes subtly related one |
| fallacies of weak induction | occur because the connection between the premises and conclusion is not strong enough to support the conclusion |
| appeal to unqualified authority | a fallacy of weak induction that occurs when the cited authority or witness lacks credibility |
| appeal to ignorance | a fallacy of weak induction that occurs when the premises of an argument state that nothing has been proved one way or the other, and the conclusion makes a definite assertion about that thing |
| hasty generalization | a fallacy of weak induction that occurs when there is a reasonable likelihood that the sample is not representative of the group |
| false cause | a fallacy of weak induction that occurs whenever the link between the premises and conclusion depends on some imagined casual connection that probably does not exist |
| slippery slope | a fallacy of weak induction occurs when the conclusion of the argument rest on an alleged chain reaction and there is not sufficient reason to think that the chain reaction will take place |
| weak analogy | a fallacy of weak induction that occurs when the analogy is not strong enough to support the conclusion that is drawn |
| fallacies of presumption | arise because the premises presume what they purport to prove. |
| fallacies of ambiguity | arise from the occurrence of some form of ambiguity in either the premises or conclusion |
| fallacies of grammatical analogy | arguments that are grammatically analogous to other arguments that are good in every respect |
| begging the question | a fallacy of presumption that is committed whenever the arguer creates the illusion that inadequate premises provide adequate support for the conclusion by leaving out a possibly false key premise |
| complex question | a fallacy of presumption that occurs when two or more questions are asking in the guise of a single question and a single answer is given to them |
| false dichotomy | a fallacy of presumption that occurs when a disjunctive premise presents two unlikely alternatives as if they were the only ones available, the arguer eliminates one, and leaves the other as the conclusion |
| suppressed evidence | a fallacy of presumption that occurs when ignores important evidence that outweighs the presented evidence, that entails a different conclusion |
| equivocation | a fallacy of ambiguity that occurs when the conclusion of an argument depends on the fact that a word or phrase is used in two different senses in the argument |
| amphiboly | a fallacy of ambiguity that occurs when the arguer misinterprets an ambiguous statement and then draws a conclusion based on this interpretation |
| composition | a fallacy of grammatical analogy that is committed when the conclusion of an argument depends on the erroneous transference of an attribute from the parts of something onto the whole |
| collective predication | occurs when attributes are assigned to each individual memeber of a class |
| distributive predication | occurs when attributes are assigned to a whole class |
| division | a fallacy of grammatical analogy that occurs when the conclusion of an argument depends on the erroneous transference of an attribute from a whole onto its parts |
| syllogism | a deductive argument consisting of two premises and one conclusion |
| major term | the predicate of the conclusion |
| minor term | the subject of the conclusion |
| middle term | provides the middle ground between the two premises and occurs in both premises but not the conclusion |
| major premise | the premise that contains the major term |
| minor premise | the premise that contains the minor term |
| a standard-form categorical syllogism | When 1) all three statements are categorical syllogisms. 2) The two occurrences of each term are identical. 3) Each term is used in the same sense throughout the argument. 4) The major premise is listed first, the minor second, and the conclusion last. |
| categorical syllogism | a deductive argument consisting of three categorical propositions that is capable of being translated into standard form. |
| mood | the letter names of the propositions that make it up. |
| figure | determined by the location of the two occurrences of the middle term in the premises. |
Created by:
AlyRuth
Popular Law sets