The term “fallacy” comes from logic where statements are either true or false. This is hardly ever what’s going on in ordinary conversation or even science, where instead we talk about evidence...
The term “fallacy” comes from logic where statements are either true or false. This is hardly ever what’s going on in ordinary conversation or even science, where instead we talk about evidence making things more or less likely.
Sometimes the dispute is over how likely something is that we haven’t investigated. In Bayesian jargon, this is a dispute about priors, or you could call it the “outside view,” or just say it’s comparing suspicions.
Maybe, but not in the way of formal logic, where you’re supposed to be able to blindly follow rules of inference like a computer and accept the results. (It might be interesting to come up with...
Maybe, but not in the way of formal logic, where you’re supposed to be able to blindly follow rules of inference like a computer and accept the results. (It might be interesting to come up with examples of everyday deductions.)
Well, most of the fallacies we apply to everyday discourse are actually informal fallacies... So yeah, you're correct when you say this is not (just...) about formal logic. Edit: this SEP article...
Well, most of the fallacies we apply to everyday discourse are actually informal fallacies... So yeah, you're correct when you say this is not (just...) about formal logic.
The term “fallacy” comes from logic where statements are either true or false. This is hardly ever what’s going on in ordinary conversation or even science, where instead we talk about evidence making things more or less likely.
Sometimes the dispute is over how likely something is that we haven’t investigated. In Bayesian jargon, this is a dispute about priors, or you could call it the “outside view,” or just say it’s comparing suspicions.
Despite our inability to be certain in many situations, deduction seems to be a common feature of regular discourse.
Maybe, but not in the way of formal logic, where you’re supposed to be able to blindly follow rules of inference like a computer and accept the results. (It might be interesting to come up with examples of everyday deductions.)
Well, most of the fallacies we apply to everyday discourse are actually informal fallacies... So yeah, you're correct when you say this is not (just...) about formal logic.
Edit: this SEP article is informative, I think
Related to a comment I made on another thread.