Fallacies

Front 1

Fallacy

Back 1

an argument which provides poor reasoning is support of its conclusion

Front 2

Begging the Question

Back 2

the arguments conclusion is used as one of its premises. the proof is assumed

Hint 2

A: he's mad right now

B: how do you know

A: because he's really angry

Front 3

Ad hominem (against the person)

Back 3

when someone tried to win an argument by denigrating its presenter

Hint 3

you claim that this man is innocent, but you cannot be trusted since you are a criminals as well

Front 4

argumentum ad populum (argument to the people)

Back 4

using an appeal to popular assent, often by arousing the feelings and enthusiasm of the multitude rather than building an argument

Hint 4

The Bold and the Listless must be a great book. It's been on the best seller list for 8 weeks

Front 5

appeal to ignorance

Back 5

using an opponent's inability to disprove a conclusion as a proof of its correctness, and using an opponent's inability to prove a conclusion as proof of its incorrectness

Hint 5

there is no proof that ghost exist, so they must exists. nobody has conclusively proven that the Yeti doesnt exist, therefore it must exist

Front 6

hasty generalization

Back 6

when jumping into conclusion about all things of a certain type based on evidence that concerns only a few things of that type

Hint 6

girls are bad drivers. I know it, because my mom and my sister are horrible drivers

Front 7

appeal to authority

Back 7

a claim is accepted not because of its merit, but because the authority (power, fame) of person saying it

Hint 7

Pope says it, must be true

Front 8

red herring

Back 8

diverting attention from the real issue by focusing instead on an issue having only a surface relevance to the first

Front 9

appeal to fear

Back 9

to use threat or harm to advance an argument

Hint 9

is we dont stop petroleum consumption, global warming will increase. therefore we need to stop immediately

Front 10

false dilemma

Back 10

it presumes that there are only two alternatives to a given problem when in fact there are more than two

Front 11

false cause

Back 11

supposing two events are connected when in fact they are not

Front 12

non sequitur (it doesn't follow)

Back 12

refers to a conclusion that isn't implied with the previous premises

Hint 12

Dave was arrested for a DUI 10 years ago. He's definitely an alcoholic.

Front 13

criteria of adequacy

Back 13

simplicity, consistency, scope, conservatism and fruitfulness

Front 14

consistency

Back 14

lack of internal contradictions

Front 15

conservatism

Back 15

how well the new fits with the old

Front 16

fruitfulness

Back 16

the amount of new facts predicted

Front 17

knowledge by acquaintance

Back 17

knowledge of what it is to have a certain experience

Hint 17

knowledge of what it's like to be pregnant

Front 18

performative knowledge

Back 18

knowledge on how to perform a certain activity

Front 19

propisitional knowledge

Back 19

knowledge whether a proposition is true or false

Hint 19

water boils at 100°C

Front 20

analytic proposition

Back 20

a proposition that is logical truth or can be turned into a logical truth by substituting synonym for synonym

Front 21

synthetic proposition

Back 21

proposition that is not analytic

Front 22

idealism (plato)

Back 22

reality is always changing, senses are illusory. knowledge needs to be permanent and unchanging

Front 23

anamnesis

Back 23

innate form of recollection, a sort of hardware we come with

Hint 23

humans come with a memory function already built in our brain evolution

Front 24

forms

Back 24

exist independently of us

Hint 24

math, logic, geometry

Front 25

Universal

Back 25

a property that can he possessed by many things at once

Hint 25

goodness, beautiful, redness

Front 26

skepticism (Pyrrho Elis)

Back 26

an attitude of suspension to the possibility of knowledge or absolute knowledge

Front 27

Pyrrhonist strategy

Back 27

to show that for every proposition supported by some evidence, there is an opposite proposition supported by evidence that is equally as good

Front 28

rationalism (Spinoza, Leibniz, Descartes)

Back 28

the view that regards reason as the chief source of knowledge

Front 29

Rationalism (Spinoza, Leibniz, Descartes)

Back 29

a methodology or a theory in which the criterion of the truth is not sense based but instead deductive

Front 30

cogito argument

Back 30

I cant doubt that I doubt. therefore I think, therefore I am.

Front 31

empiricism (John Locke, George Bishop, David Hume)

Back 31

is the idea that experience as the main source of knowledge

Front 32

empiricist

Back 32

believe in inductive reasoning in order to build a more complex body of knowledge from these direct observations