Misplaced Pages

Fallacies of illicit transference

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Informal fallacy
This article relies largely or entirely on a single source. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources.
Find sources: "Fallacies of illicit transference" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (May 2023)

A fallacy of illicit transference is an informal fallacy occurring when an argument assumes there is no difference between a term in the distributive (referring to every member of a class) and collective (referring to the class itself as a whole) sense.

There are two variations of this fallacy:

  • Fallacy of composition – assumes what is true of the parts is true of the whole. This fallacy is also known as "arguing from the specific to the general."
Since Judy is so diligent in the workplace, this entire company must have an amazing work ethic.
Because this company is so corrupt, so must every employee within it be corrupt.

While fallacious, arguments that make these assumptions may be persuasive because of the representativeness heuristic.

See also

References

  1. ^ Hurley, Patrick (2014), A Concise Introduction to Logic (12th ed.), Cengage Learning, pp. 161, 172, ISBN 978-1-285-96556-7
Common fallacies (list)
Formal
In propositional logic
In quantificational logic
Syllogistic fallacy
Informal
Equivocation
Question-begging
Correlative-based
Illicit transference
Secundum quid
Faulty generalization
Ambiguity
Questionable cause
Appeals
Consequences
Emotion
Genetic fallacy
Ad hominem
Other fallacies
of relevance
Arguments


Stub icon

This logic-related article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: