Substitute Thesis and Error of Argument
Substitute thesis and error of argument.
Replacing a thesis is a logical mistake that occurs when one does not dissolve or prove a given thesis but performs one, sometimes subtle, and sometimes roughly moving, moving, and explaining and proving another thesis on something similar or related to a given topic. This is a kind of logical manipulation because the interviewee is deceiving himself.
Arguments of error are also substitutions of theses. These errors of argument include the mistake of attacking a person (ad hominem), invoking authority (arguemntum ad verecundiam), invoking anonymous authority, and style over substance. These errors work by discussing the person making the argument, not the reasons for accepting or rejecting the conclusion.
Assault on man - ad hominem. At its simplest, the attack on the person making the argument turns away from examining the claims and conclusions. This is especially the case in political debates. different nationalities or skin colors, versions of affiliation, political orientation, sexy orientation, appearance.
Therefore, our opponent in the discussion makes a claim and attacks by attacking the opponent, not that claim, and then we made the logical mistakes of attacking the person. This is the most common form.
Invoking authority may be a useful pillar in discussions, but it should remain so. The invocation of authority cannot be used as an argument in drawing true conclusions. Of course, there are times when authority should not be invoked at all.
It is inappropriate to invoke authority where:
1. a person is not competent to express an expert opinion on a particular topic.
2. The experts disagree on a particular claim.
3. unless the authority in a particular field was serious or irrational (such as drunkenness).
So, for example, this statement can be just one example:
'Let's go to nuclear war! Last week, Ronald Regan remarked that the bombing of Russia would begin in 5 minutes. '(This was just the president's joke while testing the microphone behind the booth.)
Anonymous authority, is a mistake that can be noticed in news articles and other media. As the name implies, we will surely make this mistake unless we name the claiming authority. since it is then impossible to determine whether that authority is an expert in the field he is talking about.
This mistake actually resembles a rumor. The source of the rumors is generally unknown, so it is not easy to decide whether to believe a claim or not.
Thus, most often, politicians use this argument in debates in the form that there are rumors that their political rival committed a crime.
The key is that we do not have a specific person who makes these claims, and by the chain reaction of passing the claim from person to person, it turns into rumor and speculation.
With the use of appropriate phrases, the claim can be drawn as scientific truth - "scientifically proven", current state of affairs - "research shows" or the well-known fact "well known".
© 2019 mojugao