Accident fallacy
From Iron Chariots Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
m (added stub) |
(Added insert of "Logical fallacies") |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
| − | The '''Accident fallacy''', or '''a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid''', is when generalizations are applied to circumstances when they are otherwise flukes or exceptions. The broader the generalization, the weaker it tends to be, and is more prone to this type of fallacy. | + | The '''Accident fallacy''', or '''a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid''', is when generalizations are applied to circumstances when they are otherwise flukes or exceptions. The broader the generalization, the weaker it tends to be, and is more prone to this type of fallacy. In other words, it is insisting that the rule of thumb applies even to the exceptions. |
| − | ==Examples== | + | ===Examples=== |
* Example 1 | * Example 1 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:# Surgeons are criminals | :# Surgeons are criminals | ||
| + | * Example 2 | ||
| + | :# [[God]] gives people meaning and purpose | ||
| + | :# [[Atheist]]s have [[God gives me meaning and purpose|meaning and purpose]] | ||
| + | :# They believe in God, but are in denial | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Converse Accident Fallacy== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The '''Converse accident fallacy''' is similar to the '''accident fallacy''', except, in reverse. The exception is used to justify a generalization. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Example 1 | ||
| + | :# Speeding on the roads is illegal | ||
| + | :# The police can legally speed in an emergency | ||
| + | :# I can legally speed if it's an emergency | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Example 2 | ||
| + | :# God did [[evil]] things in pursuit of doing [[good]], and still be good | ||
| + | :# I'm trying to do good | ||
| + | :# I can do evil things while still being good | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | {{Logical fallacies}} | ||
[[Category:Arguments]] | [[Category:Arguments]] | ||
[[Category:Logical fallacies]] | [[Category:Logical fallacies]] | ||
Latest revision as of 00:49, 27 April 2011
The Accident fallacy, or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid, is when generalizations are applied to circumstances when they are otherwise flukes or exceptions. The broader the generalization, the weaker it tends to be, and is more prone to this type of fallacy. In other words, it is insisting that the rule of thumb applies even to the exceptions.
Examples
- Example 1
- Cutting people is criminal
- Surgeons cut people
- Surgeons are criminals
- Example 2
- God gives people meaning and purpose
- Atheists have meaning and purpose
- They believe in God, but are in denial
Converse Accident Fallacy
The Converse accident fallacy is similar to the accident fallacy, except, in reverse. The exception is used to justify a generalization.
- Example 1
- Speeding on the roads is illegal
- The police can legally speed in an emergency
- I can legally speed if it's an emergency
- Example 2
