User:PsychoNerd054/Logic

Back To Theories & Essays

This article will serve as a hub for the basics of logic, something that is essential to understand in order to perform proper research.

Essentials

Notions

The formal name for a concept, idea, or someone's thoughts on it is a notion.

Propositions

Propositions are either true or false.

Reasoning

Deductive Reasoning

Deductive Reasoning involves gradually going from general ideas to specific conclusions.

Inductive Reasoning

Inductive Reasoning can be thought of as the inverse of deductive reasoning, starting from a specific point to progressively reach broader conclusions. This involves collecting evidence, which is then followed by developing hypotheses and integrating any new information you find into the hypothesis afterwards. Once you've done all of that, you test the hypothesis to see if everything you've found holds up. If it doesn't, you go back to square one.

Abductive Reasoning

Abductive Reasoning starts with incomplete observations which are then used to determine the most likely, albeit tentative, prediction.

Logical Fallacies

Ad Hominem

Argumentem ad hominem (Latin for argument to the person) generally refers to making an argument based on one's character or who they are, rather than their opinions or statements. Contrary to how the fallacy is usually understood, this isn't merely calling someone names or insulting them. It also doesn't necessary have to include these actions and actually comes in many different varieties. These include: Tu quoque, Guilt by Association, and Bulverism.

Given the type of community that surrounds Chris, one that mostly comprises of gossip and being critical of others, you are bound to find this fallacy pop up A LOT. Therefore, when making changes on this wiki, it is especially crucial to spot it when someone makes a claim about Chris or any of his orbiters.

One specific version of this fallacy, and one that is also very common in the CWCSphere, is Appeal to Authority (sometimes referred to as Argument from Authority). This is when someone fallaciously uses an authority figure, regardless of their credibility or credentials, as support for their arguement.

Bandwagon

The Bandwagon fallacy (sometimes also referred to as Argumentem ad populum) is where the truth or validity of something is assumed because of what a certain group of people thinks about it. In a sense, it can be thought of as the Ad Hominem fallacy, but on a wider scale.

This fallacy is most often known for applying to instances where people follow a belief system because everyone else supports it. However, it should also be noted that this mindset can also go in the opposite extreme, where one assumes the exact opposite of a popular belief is true, simply because many people believe it.

This fallacy can also manifest in believing that two different conflicting beliefs are valid, and that the solution lies between the two of them, regardless of what actual evidence there is to support either. This is called Bothsiderism (sometimes called False Balance or simply the Balance Fallacy). The Either/Or fallacy (sometimes referred to as the False Dilemma or Black and White Reasoning) is a special case of this, as it limits an argument to two options, with no in-between at all, ignoring all other alternatives and perspectives.

Begging the Question

Begging the Question (also known as Circular Reasoning) assumes the truth and premise of an argument before its even been tested. It involves the one making their arguments assuming that their beliefs are entirely infallible, requires no changes, and that everyone else is wrong and requires no consideration. In fact, for the latter, this often times involves outright rejecting whatever arguments they make right off the bat, regardless of their validity. People can do this for a number of reasons, but most of it comes down to what is known as Confirmation Bias. This is a natural tendency in people to search for, interpret, or recall information that best supports their assumptions or values.

Cherry Picking, named after the practice of going through picked cherries to dispose of which ones are unripe or spoiled, is a specific case of this kind of bias. It involves deliberately searching for evidence that fits one's assumptions while also putting aside all other available evidence, which often times disproves or weakens them. This can include suppressing evidence.

Anecdotal Evidence is based on personal stories or accounts.

Another form of this type of bias is No True Scotsman (more often known as Moving the Goalposts).

On a wider scale, when people come together to reinforce shared beliefs, this kind of bias is referred to as being in an "echo chamber".

Strawman

Sometimes, when it is difficult to debunk an argument, instead of trying to strengthen their own arguments or improving their understanding on a given subject, one may try to present opposing views to their audience in a much weaker form. This often times involves trying to make the opposing parties seem utterly batshit insane. When one does this, they are attacking a strawman.

This fallacy comes in many different forms.

Resources

• Essentials of Logic - A pdf file of William Dinwiddie's Essentials of Logic, a resource that was used to produce this userpage.
• Logic and Reasoning - A chapter from a random OpenStax book on philosophy I found. Goes into much more detail about the concepts covered here.
• Master List of Fallacies - What I've listed in the "Logical Fallacies" section is only to make things as general and simple to understand as possible. Click on this link if you want to read a comprehensive list of possible fallacies.