|
Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false.〔K. S. Pope (2003) "Logical Fallacies in Psychology: 21 Types" (Fallacies & Pitfalls in Psychology )〕 It is also called argument to logic (''argumentum ad logicam''), fallacy fallacy, fallacist's fallacy,〔 and bad reasons fallacy. Fallacious arguments ''can'' arrive at true conclusions, so this is an informal fallacy of relevance.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url= http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/fallacists/ )〕 ==Form== It has the general argument form: :If P, then Q. :P is a fallacious argument. :Therefore, Q is false.〔 :''c'' since A :''A'' is fallacious :¬''c'' 〕 Thus, it is a special case of denying the antecedent where the antecedent, rather than being a proposition that is false, is an entire argument that is fallacious. A fallacious argument, just as with a false antecedent, can still have a consequent that happens to be true. The fallacy is in concluding the consequent of a fallacious argument has to be false. That the argument is fallacious only means that the argument cannot succeed in proving its consequent.〔John Woods, (''The death of argument: fallacies in agent based reasoning'' ), Springer 2004, pp. XXIII–XXV〕 But showing how one argument in a complex thesis is fallaciously reasoned does not necessarily invalidate the proof; the complete proof could still logically imply its conclusion if that conclusion is not dependent on the fallacy: 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Argument from fallacy」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|