Thread
:
Philosophy, Informal Fallacies & Buddhism
View Single Post
07-05-2011, 08:24 PM
#
17
Hokimjers
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
378
Senior Member
@ BuckyG:
Thanissaro Bhikkhu's academic inquiry is interesting, but I still don't see the relevance to either formal or informal fallacies, as Socrates is not known to have dealt with them. If I might be forgiven for copypasta:
However, not just any type of mistake in reasoning counts as a logical fallacy. To be a fallacy, a type of reasoning must be potentially deceptive, it must be likely to fool at least some of the people some of the time. Moreover, in order for a fallacy to be worth identifying and naming, it must be a common type of logical error.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History
Aristotle was both the first formal logician—codifying the rules of correct reasoning—and the first informal logician—cataloging types of incorrect reasoning, namely, fallacies. He was both the first to name types of logical error, and the first to group them into categories. The result is his book On Sophistical Refutations.
However, Aristotle's teacher, Plato, deserves credit for being the first philosopher to collect examples of bad reasoning, which is an important preliminary piece of field work before naming and cataloging. Plato's "Euthydemus" preserves a collection of fallacious arguments in dialogue form, putting the perhaps exaggerated examples into the mouths of two sophists. For this reason, fallacious arguments are sometimes called "sophisms" and bad reasoning "sophistry". Aristotle refers to a few of these examples as instances of his named fallacies.
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/introtof.html
Quote
Hokimjers
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Hokimjers
All times are GMT +1. The time now is
10:53 PM
.