| Line 85: |
Line 85: |
| | ===Argument from silence=== | | ===Argument from silence=== |
| | ''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 absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence." The charge of argument from silence applies in a situation in which ''no reasonable attempt has yet been made'' to develop evidence to confirm or contradict the proposition in question. | | ''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 absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence." The charge of argument from silence applies in a situation in which ''no reasonable attempt has yet been made'' to develop evidence to confirm or contradict the proposition in question. |
| − |
| |
| − | ===Proof by authority===
| |
| − | Also known as ''argumentum ab auctoritate'' ("argument proceeding from clout") or ''argumentum ad verecundiam'' ("appeal to unqualified authority"), this is an argument that a person bases on authority, either his own or that of another person, rather than on the merits of the position. When the authority involved is a relevant source who has access to more information about the topic than the people discussing it, then the argument becomes a ''citation.'' However, a valid citation must be in an area of study, research, or mental discipline in which the authority being cited is a recognized [[expert]].
| |
| − |
| |
| − | A classic example of argument from authority is a reference to a celebrity or religious leader for their opinion on a matter of science or public policy, when that celebrity or cleric has never adequately studied the subject. This kind of argument often appears in commercial advertising or political electioneering.
| |
| | | | |
| | ===False cause=== | | ===False cause=== |
| Line 108: |
Line 103: |
| | ====Proving too much==== | | ====Proving too much==== |
| | A form of overgeneralization in which one attempts to use a set of premises to sustain more conclusions than he can reasonably sustain using the argument presented. | | A form of overgeneralization in which one attempts to use a set of premises to sustain more conclusions than he can reasonably sustain using the argument presented. |
| | + | |
| | + | ===Proof by authority=== |
| | + | Also known as ''argumentum ab auctoritate'' ("argument proceeding from clout") or ''argumentum ad verecundiam'' ("appeal to unqualified authority"), this is an argument that a person bases on authority, either his own or that of another person, rather than on the merits of the position. When the authority involved is a relevant source who has access to more information about the topic than the people discussing it, then the argument becomes a ''citation.'' However, a valid citation must be in an area of study, research, or mental discipline in which the authority being cited is a recognized [[expert]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | A classic example of argument from authority is a reference to a celebrity or religious leader for their opinion on a matter of science or public policy, when that celebrity or cleric has never adequately studied the subject. This kind of argument often appears in commercial advertising or political electioneering. |
| | | | |
| | ==Fallacies of Presumption== | | ==Fallacies of Presumption== |