Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Argumentation theory. Two men argue at a political protest in New York City. Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning. With historical origins in logic, dialectic, and rhetoric, argumentation theory includes the arts and sciences of civil debate ...
Argumentation schemes are stereotypical patterns of inference, combining semantic-ontological relations with types of reasoning and logical axioms and representing the abstract structure of the most common types of natural arguments. [13] A typical example is the argument from expert opinion, shown below, which has two premises and a conclusion ...
In argumentation theory, an argumentation scheme or argument scheme is a template that represents a common type of argument used in ordinary conversation. Many different argumentation schemes have been identified. Each one has a name (for example, argument from effect to cause) and presents a type of connection between premises and a conclusion ...
Red herring – introducing a second argument in response to the first argument that is irrelevant and draws attention away from the original topic (e.g.: saying "If you want to complain about the dishes I leave in the sink, what about the dirty clothes you leave in the bathroom?"). [69] In jury trial, it is known as a Chewbacca defense.
Argumentum a fortiori (literally "argument from the stronger [reason]") (UK: / ˈ ɑː f ɔːr t i ˈ oʊ r i /, [1] US: / ˈ eɪ f ɔːr ʃ i ˈ ɔːr aɪ /) is a form of argumentation that draws upon existing confidence in a proposition to argue in favor of a second proposition that is held to be implicit in, and even more certain than, the first.
Logical reasoning is a mental activity that aims to arrive at a conclusion in a rigorous way. It happens in the form of inferences or arguments by starting from a set of premises and reasoning to a conclusion supported by these premises. The premises and the conclusion are propositions, i.e. true or false claims about what is the case.
Semantic argument is a type of argument in which one fixes the meaning of a term in order to support their argument. Semantic arguments are commonly used in public, political, academic, legal or religious discourse. Most commonly such semantic modification are being introduced through persuasive definitions, but there are also other ways of ...
Description. Argumentum ad populum is a type of informal fallacy, [ 1][ 14] specifically a fallacy of relevance, [ 15][ 16] and is similar to an argument from authority ( argumentum ad verecundiam ). [ 14][ 4][ 9] It uses an appeal to the beliefs, tastes, or values of a group of people, [ 12] stating that because a certain opinion or attitude ...