Proving too much
In philosophy, proving too much is a logical fallacy which occurs when an argument reaches the desired conclusion in such a way as to make that conclusion only a special case or corollary consequence of a larger, obviously absurd conclusion. It is a fallacy because, if the reasoning were valid, it would hold for the absurd conclusion.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In philosophy, proving too much is a logical fallacy which occurs when an argument reaches the desired conclusion in such a way as to make that conclusion only a special case or corollary consequence of a larger, obviously absurd conclusion. It is a fallacy because, if the reasoning were valid, it would hold for the absurd conclusion. The judgement of fallacy is therefore largely dependent on a normative judgement of the "absurd" conclusion. A charge of "proving too much" is thus generally invoked, rightly or wrongly, against normatively-opposed…
saved by
related reading
- Reductio ad absurdum - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
- Burdensome Detailsreadthesequences.com
- Local Validity as a Key to Sanity and Civilization — LessWronglesswrong.com
- Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paperjimpryor.net
- Liar paradox - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
- Moore's paradox - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
- Absurdismen.wikipedia.org
- Mind projection fallacy - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
- In defence of epistemic modesty — EA Forumforum.effectivealtruism.org
- Proofs That Psubstack.com
- Antinomyen.wikipedia.org
- Appeal to the stone - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org