Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.
This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book.
|
Secundum quid is more synonymous with the accident fallacy . Have a look at this definition and examples and you can see the differences. |
|||
answered on Wednesday, Oct 06, 2021 07:07:45 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD | ||||
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
||||
Comments |
||||
|
|
I'd put it under a hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, converse accident), e.g., basing a broad conclusion on a small sample. |
|||
answered on Wednesday, Oct 06, 2021 10:48:20 AM by Dr. Richard | ||||
Dr. Richard Suggested These Categories |
||||
Comments |
||||
|