| Line 86: |
Line 86: |
| | ''Argument from silence'' (in [[Latin]], ''argumentum ab silencio'') or ''argument from ignorance'' (Lat: ''ad ignorantium'') is an assertion which states that, because there is no evidence to support a given argument, the opposite must be true. The fallacy follows the form: | | ''Argument from silence'' (in [[Latin]], ''argumentum ab silencio'') or ''argument from ignorance'' (Lat: ''ad ignorantium'') is an assertion which states that, because there is no evidence to support a given argument, the opposite must be true. The fallacy follows the form: |
| | *If P then Q | | *If P then Q |
| − | *P can not be found | + | *P can not be shown true |
| | *Therefore Q is false | | *Therefore Q is false |
| | | | |
| Line 94: |
Line 94: |
| | | | |
| | ===False cause=== | | ===False cause=== |
| − | ''non causa pro causa'' | + | False cause (Lat: ''non causa pro causa'') is a fallacy which arises when a poor cause/effect link is used within an argument, especially if coincidence or chance are not taken into account. The fallacy follows the form: |
| | + | |
| | + | *P causes Q (faulty reasoning) |
| | + | *P is true |
| | + | *Therefore Q is true |
| | + | |
| | + | For example: "I used to be a well paid teacher until I started being a tougher grader. When my students' grades went down, so did my salary." While this sounds like a logical explanation, not all factors are taken into account. For example, the teacher's school could have been subject to budget cuts, or maybe the teacher was overpaid at first and now his salary corrects his true worth. |
| | + | |
| | + | ====''Post hoc ergo propter hoc''==== |
| | + | ''Post hoc ergo propter hoc'' (Lat: "after the thing, therefore because of the thing") is a subcategory of false cause fallacies. In a this type of argument, a close temportal proximity is used as a justification of a cause/effect relationship. ''Post hoc ergo propter hoc'' arguments follow the form: |
| | + | |
| | + | *P happened, then Q happened |
| | + | *Therefore P caused Q |
| | + | |
| | + | For example: "Right around the time the sun goes up my alarm clock goes off, so the sun causes my alarm clock to go off." Clearly this is not the case. |
| | | | |
| | ===Non sequitur=== | | ===Non sequitur=== |
| | : ''Main Article: [[Non sequitur]]'' | | : ''Main Article: [[Non sequitur]]'' |
| | | | |
| − | ([[Latin]]: "It does not follow"); An argument which moves from a premise to a conclusion without showing a valid connection. | + | A ''non sequitur'' (Lat: "It does not follow") is an argument which moves from a premise to a conclusion without showing a valid connection, or sometimes any connection at all. This form of argument follows the form: |
| | + | |
| | + | *If P then Q |
| | + | *Therefore R is true |
| | | | |
| | ===Overgeneralization=== | | ===Overgeneralization=== |