Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Aristotle's fallacies are primarily a catalogue of bad de... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Aristotle's fallacies are primarily a catalogue of bad deductions that appear to be good deductions.

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Apparent refutations are explained in terms of apparent deductions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.With one exception (ignoratio elenchi), each fallacy Aristotle identifies is a deduction that appears valid but is not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations treats fallacies as failures of refutation (elenchos), not merely failures of deduction (syllogismos).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A refutation requires four conditions beyond valid deduction, so apparent refutations can fail without the deduction itself being invalid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Reducing Aristotle's project to cataloguing bad deductions collapses his distinction between dialectical and demonstrative failure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Several of Aristotle's thirteen fallacies, including accent and figure of speech, are grounded in linguistic ambiguity rather than formal deductive invalidity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.John Woods and Douglas Walton argue these fallacies resist reduction to invalid inference forms and require pragmatic, not purely logical, analysis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If some fallacies are fundamentally about language misuse rather than deductive failure, the claim's scope is empirically overstated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A refutation requires four conditions beyond valid deduction, so apparent refuta...Apparent refutations are explained in terms of apparent deductions.Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations treats fallacies as failures of refutation (...If some fallacies are fundamentally about language misuse rather than deductive ...
    +4 moreShow less
    John Woods and Douglas Walton argue these fallacies resist reduction to invalid ...Reducing Aristotle's project to cataloguing bad deductions collapses his distinc...Several of Aristotle's thirteen fallacies, including accent and figure of speech...With one exception (ignoratio elenchi), each fallacy Aristotle identifies is a d...

    Similar

    All other Aristotelian fallacies involve deductions that are themselve...94%SDF defines fallacies in terms of deductive invalidity.85%What unifies Aristotle's fallacies is their dependence on the concepts...83%The standard definition of fallacies (SDF) is not as widely accepted a...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: fallacies
    View source passageHide passage
    Aristotle observed that “reasoning and refutation are sometimes real and sometimes not, but appear to be real owing to men’s inexperience; for the inexperienced are like those who view things from a distance” (SR, 1 164b25). The ideas here are first that there are arguments that appear to be better than they really are; and second that people inexperienced in arguments may mistake the appearance for the reality and thus be taken in by a bad argument or refutation. Apparent refutations are primar
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit