Bayesian reasoning has been applied formally to statistical inference, machine learning and analysing scientific method. Here I apply it informally to more common forms of inference, namely natural language arguments. I analyse a variety of traditional fallacies, deductive, inductive and causal, and find more merit in them than is generally acknowledged. Bayesian principles provide a framework ...

What are the historical origins of the argumentum ad consequentiam, the argument from (or literally, to) consequences, sometimes featured as an informal fallacy in logic textbooks? As shown in this paper, knowledge of the argument can be traced back to Aristotle (who did not treat it as a fallacy, but as a reasonable argument). And this type of argument shows a spotty history of recognition in ...

In Section 1 we describe the Sorites paradox and lay out options for a solution. In Section 2 we consider approaches which deny that all premises are true, and note that these solutions all seem open to a certain serious objection. In Section 3 we note a problem for the principle of transitivity of the conditional and present a contextualist resolution of the problem, according to which the “co...

In this paper, an analysis is given of the straw man fallacy as a misrepresentation of someone's commitments in order to refute that person's argument. With this analysis a distinction can be made between straw man and other closely related fallacies such as ad hominem, secundum quid and ad verecundiam. When alleged cases of the straw man fallacy are evaluated, the speaker's commitment should b...

Recently Oaksford and Hahn (2004) proposed a Bayesian reconstruction of a classic argumentation fallacy Locke’s ‘argument from ignorance.’ Here this account is extended to what is probably the most well-known of all argumentation fallacies: circular reasoning or ‘begging the question’. A Bayesian analysis is shown to clarify when and where circular reasoning is good or bad, and how seeming para...

In this age of fake news and alternative facts, the need for a citizenry capable of critical thinking has never been greater. While teaching critical thinking skills in the classroom remains an enduring challenge, research on an ill-defined domain like critical thinking in the educational technology space is even more scarce. We propose a difficulty factors assessment (DFA) to explore two facto...

Since John Locke, the so-called argument from ignorance has been considered to be a fallacy, and is widely represented in informal logic textbooks as an example of incorrect reasoning. This might seem surprising to researchers in many scientific disciplines who routinely draw inferences from negative evidence. Oaksford and Hahn (2004) argued that this discrepancy can be explained within a Bayes...

In the experience of teaching courses on informal logic and argumentation, one finds that the fault of being overly rigid and absolutistic in thinking, of being too insensitive to the defeasible nature of much ordinary reasoning, is an important type of error. In a critical discussion, it is important for an arguer to be open to refutation, to admitting her argument was wrong, should convincing...