Informal Fallacies

Conclusion irrelevant or ignoratio elenchi rebuttal or ignorant or evade the question: is the logical fallacy of presenting an argument that can be used by itself, but that proves or supports a different proposition that we should support. He believed that all environment logical fallacies can be reduced to ignoratio elenchi. New York has a number of energy supply companies, the one offering the best prices and service in New York City is Also in some cases these findings are irrelevant NY deliberate attempts by manipulators, experts in logical fallacies, to change the subject of conversation.
Example: Paul is a good athlete and should win the crown. After all, it’s a good guy, has donated much money and is a member of an NGO. Donations or solidary preferences green energy are not about the worthiness of a sports drink. Tu quoque ( “you too” in Latin) is a specific type of ignoratio elenchi because it is based on the premise that council or by a person is wrong because this is still not the same person.
Example: “Thomas Jefferson said that slavery was wrong. However, it was slaves. Therefore it follows that his claim is wrong and slavery should be good. “
Straw man fallacy. The error of the straw man or scarecrow. One goal / point, easy to replace the lower real
Argumentum ad hominem, or argument to the man consists in replicating the argument by attacking or by contacting the person making the argument rather than the substance of the argument. Tu quoque in which they reveal is often a dirty facility.
Example: You say this man is innocent but can not be credible because you’re also a criminal.
Straw man electricity fallacy of argumentum ad or logically: It is a logical fallacy based on the confusion of the opponent’s position. Generate a “straw man” position is to create an easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent to shatter. In fact the gas opponent’s real argument is not refuted but the dummy argument New York State that has been created. the green gas revolution, looks after the environment, and offers you the best energy solution in New York, from The name comes from the men of straw are used for training in combat and are easy to break. Ie, the fringes are attacked or possible misunderstandings that can be done with New York City the premise. Example: Peter: “I think that children should not run the streets with much natural gas trafico . John builds and creates a position of attack: “I think it would be foolish to lock children all day without air limpio . In this way, John can attack a radical position and easy to Pedro never wanted to imply. The only way to avoid the straw man is to be destroyed before Pedro Juan or demonstrate the intention of John’s to create confusion.
Argumentum ad silentia aimed to silence or argument consists in considering that the silence of a speaker or speaker on a subject test or X suggests that the draftsman is ignorant about X, or have a reason to remain silent with respect to X. Inconnection with this fallacy, it is necessary ESCOs to refer to the legal doctrine known as procedural- propios of acts, by which, in one of its most frequent applications, if a party does not claim a true fact information, evidence or argument to make it available to process, it is presumed that lack of it. Therefore, even though logically silentia or to the argumentum ex silentia is a fallacy, because the silence of one participant can not be taken as evidence of certainty of what was said by a participant, in the field of rhetoric can be an indication of lack arguments or lack of ability to counter the arguments made by dialectically adversity. This presumption is made in the legal field as this is a subjective marked by laws that are made so that the majority can be met. That is because most have the prejudice that the silence energy service company of an interlocutor implies the absence of argument or to have a particular reason and also because it breaks the normal state has an obligation to prove the allegations with arguments. See Fallacy of escape the burden of proof.
Ad hoc hypothesis: in philosophy and science, ad hoc often means the addition of corollary hypothesis or adjustments to a scientific or philosophical theories to bridge the theory to be rejected or refuted by any abnormalities and problems that were not anticipated in the original way . See also the fallacy in which the sniper or the logical consequences which are supposed to provide is developed after seeing the data. Philosophers and scientists behave so that doubts about the theories and continuously so inelegant ad hoc adjustments or ad hoc hypothesis, as these are often characteristics of pseudo-theories. Much of the scientific work lies in the utilities modification of existing theories New York or hypotheses, but these changes are distinguished from ad hoc changes that the new changes in turn suggest new ways to counter or be refuted or falsified.