Informal fallacy

An informal fallacy is an argument whose stated premises fail to support its proposed conclusion. The problem with an informal fallacy often stems from a flaw in reasoning that render the conclusion unpersuasive. In contrast to a formal fallacy of deduction, the error is not merely a flaw in logic.

Formal deductive fallacies and informal fallacies

Formal fallacies of deductive reasoning fail to follow the rules of logic that guarantee a true conclusion follows given the truth of the premises. This is said to render the argument invalid.

Inductive fallacies are not formal in this sense. Their merit is judged in terms of rational persuasiveness, inductive strength or methodology (for example, statistical inference). For instance, the fallacy of hasty generalization, can be roughly stated as an invalid syllogism:

1. A is an X
2. A is also a Y
3. Therefore, all Xs are also Ys

While never a valid deduction, if such an inference can be made on statistical grounds, it may nonetheless be convincing.

See also

Main article: List of fallacies

• Argumentation theory
• Argument map
• Critical thinking
• Inference objection
• Inquiry
• Lemma
• Sophism

Further reading

• Damer, T. E.; Rudinow, J.; Barry, V. E.; Munson, R.; Black, A.; Salmon, M. H.; Cederblom, J.; Paulsen, D.; Epstein, R. L.; Kernberger, C.; Others, (2009). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments (6E ed.). Wadsworth. ISBN 978-0-495-09506-4. 

External links

• Logical fallacies A list of logical fallacies, explained.
• The Fallacy Files: Informal Fallacy