FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Logical fallacy templates"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | *'''<nowiki>{{appeal to authority}}</nowiki>''': {{appeal to authority}} | ||
*'''<nowiki>{{appeal to emotion}}</nowiki>''': {{appeal to emotion}} | *'''<nowiki>{{appeal to emotion}}</nowiki>''': {{appeal to emotion}} | ||
*'''<nowiki>{{bandwagon}}</nowiki>''': {{bandwagon}} | *'''<nowiki>{{bandwagon}}</nowiki>''': {{bandwagon}} | ||
Revision as of 22:45, 17 August 2015
- {{appeal to authority}}:
Contents
- 1 Logical Fallacy: Appeal to authority—The author claims that someone is an authority on a topic, and that because this authority made a statement regarding that topic, that he or she is probably correct.
- 2 Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument.
- 3 Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.
- 4 Logical Fallacy: Black-or-White—The author presents two alternative states as the only two possibilities, when more possibilities exist.
- 5 Logical Fallacy: Burden of Proof—The author assumes that the burden of proof is not his or her responsibility, but rather the responsibility of someone else who must disprove the claim.
- 6 Logical Fallacy: Composition/Division—The author assumed that one part of something had to be applied to everything.
- 7 Logical Fallacy: False Cause—The author assumes that a real or perceived relationship between two events means that one caused the other.
- 8 Logical Fallacy: Genetic—The author determines whether something is truthful or false on the basis of who said it.
- 9 Logical Fallacy: Argument from Ignorance—The author has difficulty understanding the topic, so he or she assumes that it simply must not have any validity.
- 10 Logical Fallacy: Special Pleading—The author creates a one-sided argument by including favorable data and excluding unfavorable data through improper means. In this case, the author "moved the goalpost" by changing his argument when his original claim was shown to be false.
- 11 Logical Fallacy: Texas Sharpshooter—The author located some pattern in the data that he or she believes was the cause of something else, despite the lack of any supporting connection, and asserted that this was, in fact, the actual cause.
- 12 Logical Fallacy: Strawman—The author sets up a weakened or caricatured version of the opponent's argument. The author then proceeds to demolish the weak version of the argument, and claim victory.
Logical Fallacy: Appeal to authority—The author claims that someone is an authority on a topic, and that because this authority made a statement regarding that topic, that he or she is probably correct.
- {{appeal to emotion}}:
Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument.
- {{bandwagon}}:
Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.
- {{black or white}}:
Logical Fallacy: Black-or-White—The author presents two alternative states as the only two possibilities, when more possibilities exist.
- {{burden of proof}}:
Logical Fallacy: Burden of Proof—The author assumes that the burden of proof is not his or her responsibility, but rather the responsibility of someone else who must disprove the claim.
- {{composition-division}}:
Logical Fallacy: Composition/Division—The author assumed that one part of something had to be applied to everything.
- {{false cause}}:
Logical Fallacy: False Cause—The author assumes that a real or perceived relationship between two events means that one caused the other.
- {{genetic}}:
Logical Fallacy: Genetic—The author determines whether something is truthful or false on the basis of who said it.
- {{personal incredulity}}:
Logical Fallacy: Argument from Ignorance—The author has difficulty understanding the topic, so he or she assumes that it simply must not have any validity.
- {{special pleading}}:
Logical Fallacy: Special Pleading—The author creates a one-sided argument by including favorable data and excluding unfavorable data through improper means. In this case, the author "moved the goalpost" by changing his argument when his original claim was shown to be false.
- {{texas sharpshooter}}:
Logical Fallacy: Texas Sharpshooter—The author located some pattern in the data that he or she believes was the cause of something else, despite the lack of any supporting connection, and asserted that this was, in fact, the actual cause.
- {{strawman}}:
Logical Fallacy: Strawman—The author sets up a weakened or caricatured version of the opponent's argument. The author then proceeds to demolish the weak version of the argument, and claim victory.