Difference between revisions of "Damning the Alternatives"
(creating page) |
(Adding Popper on alternatives) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Damning the Alternatives''' is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone ranks favorably a certain position by selectively choosing just its pros while treats all other alternatives with bias, emphasizing solely their cons. From logical standpoint, one cannot prove that the position A is a better one or superior to others just by showing that there are difficulties with other positions. | '''Damning the Alternatives''' is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone ranks favorably a certain position by selectively choosing just its pros while treats all other alternatives with bias, emphasizing solely their cons. From logical standpoint, one cannot prove that the position A is a better one or superior to others just by showing that there are difficulties with other positions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | According to [[Karl Popper]], a noted authority on scientific methodology, whenever a [[hypothesis]] appears to a [[scientist]] as the only possible one, it should be taken as a sign that he or she have neither understood the hypothesis nor the problem which it was intended to solve. He also urges investigators to construct ''alternative'' theories - althernatives even to those theories which appear to one inescapable. Only in that way the theories held could be understood.<ref name="Hedtke">{{cite book | ||
| + | |author=Randal Hedtke | ||
| + | |title=Secrets of the Sixth Edition | ||
| + | |publisher=Master Books | ||
| + | |place=Portland, Oregon | ||
| + | |year=2010 | ||
| + | |pages=139 | ||
| + | |isbn=978-0-89051-597-6 | ||
| + | |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=gvyHquVubDoC}}</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==References== | ||
| + | <references/> | ||
[[Category:Logic]] | [[Category:Logic]] | ||
[[Category:Logical Fallacies]] | [[Category:Logical Fallacies]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Methodology of Science]] | ||
Revision as of 20:41, November 25, 2015
Damning the Alternatives is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone ranks favorably a certain position by selectively choosing just its pros while treats all other alternatives with bias, emphasizing solely their cons. From logical standpoint, one cannot prove that the position A is a better one or superior to others just by showing that there are difficulties with other positions.
According to Karl Popper, a noted authority on scientific methodology, whenever a hypothesis appears to a scientist as the only possible one, it should be taken as a sign that he or she have neither understood the hypothesis nor the problem which it was intended to solve. He also urges investigators to construct alternative theories - althernatives even to those theories which appear to one inescapable. Only in that way the theories held could be understood.[1]
References
- ↑ Randal Hedtke (2010). Secrets of the Sixth Edition. Master Books, 139. ISBN 978-0-89051-597-6.