Changes

259 bytes added ,  22:25, February 27, 2008
Rewrite
Line 40: Line 40:     
Newton's laws are not an example of an overgeneralization, but an example of an inferrence that didn't generalize as much and so shouldn't be in that set. The argument from authority section also misses that experts are only relevant if they have access to more resources of some form not accesible to the people in question (although strictly speaking, from a formal logical perspective, such an argument is never valid- but we seem to be not distinguishing between formal and informal logic here). [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 10:36, 6 March 2007 (EST)
 
Newton's laws are not an example of an overgeneralization, but an example of an inferrence that didn't generalize as much and so shouldn't be in that set. The argument from authority section also misses that experts are only relevant if they have access to more resources of some form not accesible to the people in question (although strictly speaking, from a formal logical perspective, such an argument is never valid- but we seem to be not distinguishing between formal and informal logic here). [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 10:36, 6 March 2007 (EST)
 +
 +
== Rewrite ==
 +
 +
I would like to do a rewrite of this article. Does anyone object to me recategorizing the fallacies? If they are in some order now I can't really tell what it is. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 17:25, 27 February 2008 (EST)
5,580

edits