[WikiEN-l] Re: Categories and NPOV

[Geoffrey Bell]

On 7/2/05, Nathan J. Yoder <njyoder at energon.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> If you could provide specific examples of what you consider POV within
> a logical fallacy article, I'd like to see them.
> 
> From "Ad hominem"

"An *ad hominem* argument, also known as *argumentum ad hominem*
(Latin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin>,
literally "argument [aimed] at the person", but usually translated as 
"argument to the man"), is a logical
fallacy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy>that involves
replying to an argument or assertion by addressing the person
presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself or an 
argument pointing out an inconsistency between a view expressed by an 
individual and the remainder of his or her beliefs."

>From "Wishful thinking":

In addition to being a cognitive
bias<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias>and a poor way of
making
decisions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_making>, wishful thinking 
can also be a specific logical
fallacy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy>in an argument
when it is assumed that because we wish something to be true
or false that it is actually true or false. 

For example:
 The teacher gave us a difficult exam! We shouldn't have to be subjected to 
such stress under the course of our education. 

It may be that it was uncomfortable, but that does not mean that 
uncomfortable things should always be avoided. Wishful thinking
underlies appeals
to emotion <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion>, and is a red 
herring <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_%28fallacy%29>.
 

 
 I would like to mention that I don't agree that "we shouldn't have to be 
subjected to such stress under the course of our education," but I certainly 
know some who do.
--~~~~