Term
|
Definition
The idea that historians can and should approach their craft without the assistance of any preconceived notions, ideas, questions, paradigms, etc |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Many questions |
|
Definition
Framing a question in such a way that two or more questions are asked at once , and a single answer is demanded Framing a question in such away as to beg another one Framing a question with false or unproven pretenses Framing a simple answer and demanding a simple answer |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Declarative Questions |
|
Definition
When someone writes a declarative statement, but disguises it as a question |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Counterquestions |
|
Definition
What happens when someone frames a question that is the opposite of someone else's |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Tautological Questions |
|
Definition
A tautology is when you state the same thing in more than one way involves stating something that is true by definition and cannot be contradicted |
|
|
Term
Fallacy of Dramatic Overstatement |
|
Definition
Framing a question in such a way as to artificially increase the drama inherent to the piece and to bring attention to the historian's brilliance |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Pseudo Proof |
|
Definition
Seemingly clear, concise, detailed evidence, turns out to be unconnected or cannot be taken literally EX Polls |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Irrelevant Proof |
|
Definition
Asking 1 question and answering another, completely different |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Negative Proof |
|
Definition
Trying to use an absence of evidence to prove something |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Presumptive Proof |
|
Definition
When a historian makes a claim and then leaves it for someone else to prove, or promises that it will be proves later EX Darwin |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Prevalent Proof |
|
Definition
Using mass opinion as a method of fact verification |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Possible Proof |
|
Definition
This involves trying to prove something did happen, by proving that it could happen |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Misplaced Literalism |
|
Definition
Contextual fallacy where the author takes something that was meant to be metaphorical or hyperbolic and reads it a literally |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A historian has to know everything about a subject before he or she can pick out the significance from it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
rises from a false assumption that there are essences a basic meat to which a person, ideology or historical age can be deduced to |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Shock and Awe the only facts a historian should be interested in are the incredible and entertaining |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When one looks for perpetual conspiracies and back dealings constantly assumes that everything mush have and ulterior motive. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
implies that the undesirable opposes nature. It presumes that what ought to be—something deemed preferable—corresponds with what is or naturally occurs. The asserted moral is reasoned a priori as natural. Warfare is destructive and tragic, and so it is not of human nature |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
evidence is chosen simply because its practical and it serves the purpose of the author |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Chooses facts based on beauty/sacrifices facts for the sake of a nice story |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of false Periodization |
|
Definition
stating something in your work and saying it happened in a certain time when it did not |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
facts that count best count most |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
idea that facts which count best, count least |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Statistic Sampling |
|
Definition
when we make a generalization without a sufficient body of data |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of the Lonely Fact |
|
Definition
using a single case to try and establish a generalization |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Statistical Nonsense |
|
Definition
catchall category for statistical mumbo jumbo both actually mean nothing People are Intimidated by Numbers |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Insidious Generalization |
|
Definition
an author swears up and down that he/she will not under any circumstance generalize and then do it anyway |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of the Double Reversing Generalization |
|
Definition
a non-generalization reversing itself multiple times |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of overwhelming exception |
|
Definition
a generalization is made but then a single exception is provided that is so huge it invalidates an entire point |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Anachronism |
|
Definition
Judging one time period by the standards, mores, truths, or customs of another time, or analyzing a time period as if later customs, information, or standards were known at that time. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Presentism |
|
Definition
This Fallacy occurs when the earlier parts of a narrative are defined and interpreted entirely in terms of what comes later. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
this fallacy turns Presentism on its head. Instead of the present interpreting the past, it is the past interpreting the present. "Good ol Days" "the Golden age" |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy involves using standards and ideas that worked in one time to make suggestions and interpretations in another. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Circular Proof |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when an author assumes part of the answer he is trying to prove, and then uses it as evidence to prove his answer. It is a form of question begging. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of False Periodization |
|
Definition
This involves assigning inappropriate temporal limits to a historical problem. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Post Hoc, Propter Hoc |
|
Definition
Latin for “After this, therefore because of this.” This fallacy is the mistaken belief that if event B occurred after event A, event B must have happened because of event A. A Prime Example: The Spanish Armada |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Cum Hoc, Propter Hoc |
|
Definition
Latin for “With this, therefore because of this.” This fallacy mistakes correlation for causation. It takes notes of similar trends, and automatically assumes that the trends are influencing each other. Example of presidents elected in years ending with a “0.” |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Pro Hoc, Propter Hoc |
|
Definition
Latin for “Before this, therefore because of this.” This fallacy consists of putting the effect before the cause. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy reduces complexity to simplicity. It takes a complex matrix of causes, whacks them down to one or two, and then ignores the rest |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Indiscriminate Pluralism |
|
Definition
This fallacy is the opposite of the Reductive Fallacy. It posits a vague grouping of possible causes, without really digging into the implications of any of them. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Responsibility as a Cause |
|
Definition
This fallacy assigns responsibility, and then assumes that responsibility means cause as well. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy involves ascribing intelligence and motivation to inanimate objects, ideas, or events: a form of inappropriate anthropomorphism or anthropropathism For instance, is there such a thing as a truly “national character”? How about a “young” nation? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we treat intelligent, rational creatures as mere objects. The most blatant form of this fallacy is Marxist/materialist history. We could also call it the social “science” fallacy. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This involves the tacit assumption that everything a human does is for a rational, informed reason |
|
|
Term
The Fallacies of Mass-Man |
|
Definition
we try to identify what the mob is thinking, and then assume that everyone involved had the same thought processes. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacies of Man-Mass |
|
Definition
, we discover the thought processes of a select few, and then assume that the larger body thought along similar lines. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy assumes that every person who has or is experiencing an event, intuitively knows that he has experienced it, grasps its implications, and then acts accordingly. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Composition |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we identify the properties of one member of the group, and then assume that the properties of the group are automatically the same. Similar to Man-Mass, but much more. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is the converse of Composition. It occurs when we reason falsely from a quality of the group to a quality of an individual. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Difference |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we focus so much on what sets the group in question apart from other groups that we ignore or minimize commonalities. Historians do this all the time with the Puritans. |
|
|
Term
The Converse Fallacy of Difference |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we single out one group for something that is allegedly unique to them, when in reality that “unique” quality is shared by a number of other groups. Often used as an excuse to condemn the group. The Salem Witch-craft trials |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we study a group by focusing exclusively on its upper echelon. This fallacy has to do with what parts of a group we choose to study. Elites often are the easiest |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This can be defined at least three different ways: A classification people into fixed biological groups. A false classification of a learned, cultural, or ideological behavior in terms of biology, physiology, or heredity. A false prejudice, for or against any biological or ethnic group. There is no significant difference between “races” in a physiological, biological, or genetic sense. Race does not predetermine identity or action. What does? Culture and sub-culture. The race of your subject or your subject’s group is never an appropriate category of thought. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of the Insidious Analogy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when authors slip an analogy into their text, without warning their readers that its coming McCarthy and “Witch hunting.” |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of the Perfect Analogy |
|
Definition
This fallacy consists of reasoning from a partial resemblance between two entities to an entire and exact correspondence. This fallacy often appears in attempts to evaluate something. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of the False Analogy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when an author slips a secondary premise into the analogy, without providing evidence of a direct connection between the two items. The fallacy is very similar to that of the fallacy of perfect analogy, but it doesn’t insist that everything line up perfectly; it is often used in defense of an agenda. Civil Rights and Gay Rights |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of the Multiple Analogy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when an author slips two or more analogies into one. Alfred Sedgwick: The growing size of London bodes evil for England, because London is the heart of England, and a swollen heart is a sign of disease. Let’s take this apart. There are three basic parts: London is analogous to a heart. A swollen heart is a sign of disease. Therefore, the growth of London threatens England. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Proof by Analogy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs any time an author uses an analogy as a central proof in any argument. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Prediction by Analogy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when an author uses an analogy to predict future events, and has other, better sorts of evidence at his or her disposal. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone uses a word or expression that has two or more possible meanings, and then fails to provide enough contextual pointers to the reader to know clearly which of the meanings is correct. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is a fallacy where lazy syntax and grammar obscure your meaning and annoy your readers. It can involve pronouns with more than one possible reference, misplaced modifiers, or elliptical constructions. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when an author misuses a figure of speech or other figurative language in such a way that it is impossible to tell whether they should be taken literally or not. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Antiphrasis |
|
Definition
This involves using a word in such a way that it actually means the opposite of what it is supposed to mean “Next, the ‘honorable’ Ronald Adair began a career of burglary.” |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Catachresis |
|
Definition
This occurs when we misapply a word, possibly intentionally, possibly because we know no better “The Republicans in Congress were decimated after the election.” But it turns out that though they lost a number of seats, they still held a majority. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This involves inserting or excluding words, ostensibly for the sake of clarity, and in doing so, we change the meaning of the sentence. Original sentence: “George stood strongly against the movement for direct election of senators.” Modified sentence 1: “George stood strongly…for direct election of senators.” Modified sentence 2: “George [was vaguely against] the direct election of senators.” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This occurs when a word is sacrificed to taste or political correctness calling a dead body “remains” or referring to death as “passing on.” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Using exaggerated terms to convey meaning Some one is, “older than time itself.” At a battle, someone witnessed the “utter destruction” of an army.” But what if the army continued to exist? (Army of Tennessee) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This occurs when we invert the relationship between words, and in so doing invert their meaning Original sentence: “the Tuscan trumpet’s blare,” Modified sentence: “the Tuscan blare of the trumpet.” |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of The Double or Multiple Negative |
|
Definition
This occurs when we negate the plain meaning of the sentence several times. “I am not, indeed, sure whether or not it is true to say that Milton who once seemed not unlike a seventeenth-century Shelly, had not become….” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
this is an understatement, often again for style or taste calling a “fight” an “altercation.” Using euphemisms like this can abnormally soften a hard situation. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Prosopopeia |
|
Definition
using a person to represent a type referring to something as “Hamiltonian” or “Jeffersonian” The trouble is, just how much like Jefferson or Hamilton is this thing? |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Suggestio Falsi |
|
Definition
This is a statement that, while literally true, leads one to draw a false inference. “Is X a good worker?” “X is my friend, and so I would rather not speculate.” We haven’t really said yes or no, and have used no evidence, but the obvious implication is that X is a bum. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when the meaning of a part of an argument is distorted by the emphasis or accent placed upon it. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Equivocation |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs whenever a single term is used in two or more ways in a single argument. The example of evolution (again): “The fact of evolution is clearly proved by the evolution exhibited when dark colored moths dominate in dark colored environments, as the light colored moths die due to natural selection.” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is a form of the Fallacy of Equivocation, but it occurs when two are more people are involved. The equivocation occurs, in this case, when someone changes as definition as a term passes from one person to another. Freedom vs. Freedom Herbert Apthecker’s American Negro Slave Revolts |
|
|
Term
The Black-or-White Fallacy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we use imprecise terms in absolute ways. “A chilly wind blew across the battlefield. As a result, the march must have been delayed due to numb hands and feet.” “The crowd murmured their disdain for the speaker, and the atmosphere in the room quickly became heated.” Beware the inherent bias against all morality but liberal morality. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad verecundiam |
|
Definition
This fallacy is an appeal to authority. It occurs when an author does not attempt to provide evidence that something is true, but rather insists that a person must accept this or that because some big name somewhere insists that they do. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy if argument ad hominem |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone attempts to take the attention off the argument by focusing attention on the arguer. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad baculum |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone appeals to force to settle an argument. Literally means “Big Stick.” In effect, one side tells the other that if they do not agree with a certain point, they will hurt them physically, mentally or emotionally. Examples: Hitler; Speech rules on college campuses |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad temperantium |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs with an appeal to moderation, on the apparent idea that the middle ground is automatically true. And yet there are clearly times that one extreme or the other is right: Pre-WWII Germany |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad antiquitam and the Counterfallacy of argument ad novitam |
|
Definition
These fallacies are opposite each other. In the former, we say that something is right just because it is old, and in the latter we say that it is right simply because it is new. |
|
|
Term
The Fallist’s Fallacy involves |
|
Definition
seeing a fallacy behind every bush, and then assuming various and sundry things about them that don’t necessarily apply. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when the meaning of a part of an argument is distorted by the emphasis or accent placed upon it. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when the meaning of a part of an argument is distorted by the emphasis or accent placed upon it. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Equivocation |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs whenever a single term is used in two or more ways in a single argument. The example of evolution (again): “The fact of evolution is clearly proved by the evolution exhibited when dark colored moths dominate in dark colored environments, as the light colored moths die due to natural selection.” |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Equivocation |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs whenever a single term is used in two or more ways in a single argument. The example of evolution (again): “The fact of evolution is clearly proved by the evolution exhibited when dark colored moths dominate in dark colored environments, as the light colored moths die due to natural selection.” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is a form of the Fallacy of Equivocation, but it occurs when two are more people are involved. The equivocation occurs, in this case, when someone changes as definition as a term passes from one person to another. Freedom vs. Freedom Herbert Apthecker’s American Negro Slave Revolts |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is a form of the Fallacy of Equivocation, but it occurs when two are more people are involved. The equivocation occurs, in this case, when someone changes as definition as a term passes from one person to another. Freedom vs. Freedom Herbert Apthecker’s American Negro Slave Revolts |
|
|
Term
The Black-or-White Fallacy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we use imprecise terms in absolute ways. “A chilly wind blew across the battlefield. As a result, the march must have been delayed due to numb hands and feet.” “The crowd murmured their disdain for the speaker, and the atmosphere in the room quickly became heated.” Beware the inherent bias against all morality but liberal morality. |
|
|
Term
The Black-or-White Fallacy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we use imprecise terms in absolute ways. “A chilly wind blew across the battlefield. As a result, the march must have been delayed due to numb hands and feet.” “The crowd murmured their disdain for the speaker, and the atmosphere in the room quickly became heated.” Beware the inherent bias against all morality but liberal morality. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad verecundiam |
|
Definition
This fallacy is an appeal to authority. It occurs when an author does not attempt to provide evidence that something is true, but rather insists that a person must accept this or that because some big name somewhere insists that they do. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad verecundiam |
|
Definition
This fallacy is an appeal to authority. It occurs when an author does not attempt to provide evidence that something is true, but rather insists that a person must accept this or that because some big name somewhere insists that they do. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy if argument ad hominem |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone attempts to take the attention off the argument by focusing attention on the arguer. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy if argument ad hominem |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone attempts to take the attention off the argument by focusing attention on the arguer. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad baculum |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone appeals to force to settle an argument. Literally means “Big Stick.” In effect, one side tells the other that if they do not agree with a certain point, they will hurt them physically, mentally or emotionally. Examples: Hitler; Speech rules on college campuses |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad baculum |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone appeals to force to settle an argument. Literally means “Big Stick.” In effect, one side tells the other that if they do not agree with a certain point, they will hurt them physically, mentally or emotionally. Examples: Hitler; Speech rules on college campuses |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad temperantium |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs with an appeal to moderation, on the apparent idea that the middle ground is automatically true. And yet there are clearly times that one extreme or the other is right: Pre-WWII Germany |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad temperantium |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs with an appeal to moderation, on the apparent idea that the middle ground is automatically true. And yet there are clearly times that one extreme or the other is right: Pre-WWII Germany |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad antiquitam and the Counterfallacy of argument ad novitam |
|
Definition
These fallacies are opposite each other. In the former, we say that something is right just because it is old, and in the latter we say that it is right simply because it is new. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad antiquitam and the Counterfallacy of argument ad novitam |
|
Definition
These fallacies are opposite each other. In the former, we say that something is right just because it is old, and in the latter we say that it is right simply because it is new. |
|
|
Term
The Fallist’s Fallacy involves |
|
Definition
seeing a fallacy behind every bush, and then assuming various and sundry things about them that don’t necessarily apply. |
|
|
Term
The Fallist’s Fallacy involves |
|
Definition
seeing a fallacy behind every bush, and then assuming various and sundry things about them that don’t necessarily apply. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when the meaning of a part of an argument is distorted by the emphasis or accent placed upon it. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of Equivocation |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs whenever a single term is used in two or more ways in a single argument. The example of evolution (again): “The fact of evolution is clearly proved by the evolution exhibited when dark colored moths dominate in dark colored environments, as the light colored moths die due to natural selection.” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is a form of the Fallacy of Equivocation, but it occurs when two are more people are involved. The equivocation occurs, in this case, when someone changes as definition as a term passes from one person to another. Freedom vs. Freedom Herbert Apthecker’s American Negro Slave Revolts |
|
|
Term
The Black-or-White Fallacy |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when we use imprecise terms in absolute ways. “A chilly wind blew across the battlefield. As a result, the march must have been delayed due to numb hands and feet.” “The crowd murmured their disdain for the speaker, and the atmosphere in the room quickly became heated.” Beware the inherent bias against all morality but liberal morality. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad verecundiam |
|
Definition
This fallacy is an appeal to authority. It occurs when an author does not attempt to provide evidence that something is true, but rather insists that a person must accept this or that because some big name somewhere insists that they do. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy if argument ad hominem |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone attempts to take the attention off the argument by focusing attention on the arguer. |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad baculum |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs when someone appeals to force to settle an argument. Literally means “Big Stick.” In effect, one side tells the other that if they do not agree with a certain point, they will hurt them physically, mentally or emotionally. Examples: Hitler; Speech rules on college campuses |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad temperantium |
|
Definition
This fallacy occurs with an appeal to moderation, on the apparent idea that the middle ground is automatically true. And yet there are clearly times that one extreme or the other is right: Pre-WWII Germany |
|
|
Term
The Fallacy of argument ad antiquitam and the Counterfallacy of argument ad novitam |
|
Definition
These fallacies are opposite each other. In the former, we say that something is right just because it is old, and in the latter we say that it is right simply because it is new. |
|
|
Term
The Fallist’s Fallacy involves |
|
Definition
seeing a fallacy behind every bush, and then assuming various and sundry things about them that don’t necessarily apply. |
|
|