A Misuse of Bayes's Theorem

Informal Logic 19 (1) (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper I identify a fallacy. The fallacy is worth noting for practical and theoretical reasons. First, the rampant occurrences ofthis fallacy-especially at moments calling for careful thought-indicate that it is more pernicious to clear thinking than many of those found in standard logic texts. Second, the fallacy stands apart from most others in that it contains multiple kinds oflogical error (i.e., fallacious and non-fallacious logical errors) that are themselves committed in abnormal ways, and thus it presents a two-tiered challenge to oversimplified accounts of how an argument can go bad

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,937

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Lord Scroop Fallacy.Herman E. Stark - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (3).
Argument from Fallacy.Christian Cotton - 2018-05-09 - In Robert Arp, Steven Barbone & Michael Bruce (eds.), Bad Arguments. Wiley. pp. 125–127.
Fallacies of Accident.David Botting - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (2):267-289.
How fallacious is the consequence fallacy?Wai-Hung Wong & Zanja Yudell - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 165 (1):221-227.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-03

Downloads
96 (#219,477)

6 months
30 (#117,463)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

Can human irrationality be experimentally demonstrated?L. Jonathan Cohen - 1981 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4 (3):317-370.

Add more references