background preloader

Rhetoric & Fallacies

Facebook Twitter

Dictionnaire de rhétorique et des figures de style. Lexique, Définition. Figurez-vous que vous avez du style! On pourrait croire que les figures de style sont l’apanage des grands auteurs et des professeurs de français qui prennent plaisir à tourmenter leurs étudiants...

Figurez-vous que vous avez du style!

Pourtant, chacun de nous emploie quotidiennement plusieurs procédés stylistiques. SCHOPENHAUER'S 38 STRATAGEMS, OR 38 WAYS TO WIN AN ARGUMENT. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), was a brilliant German philosopher.


These 38 Stratagems are excerpts from "The Art of Controversy", first translated into English and published in 1896. Carry your opponent's proposition beyond its natural limits; exaggerate it. The more general your opponent's statement becomes, the more objections you can find against it. The more restricted and narrow his or her propositions remain, the easier they are to defend by him or her. The Art of Being Right. The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831) (Eristische Dialektik: Die Kunst, Recht zu Behalten) is an acidulous and sarcastic treatise written by the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer in sarcastic deadpan.[1] In it, Schopenhauer examines a total of thirty-eight methods of showing up one's opponent in a debate.

The Art of Being Right

He introduces his essay with the idea that philosophers have concentrated in ample measure on the rules of logic, but have not (especially since the time of Immanuel Kant) engaged with the darker art of the dialectic, of controversy. Whereas the purpose of logic is classically said to be a method of arriving at the truth, dialectic, says Schopenhauer, "...on the other hand, would treat of the intercourse between two rational beings who, because they are rational, ought to think in common, but who, as soon as they cease to agree like two clocks keeping exactly the same time, create a disputation, or intellectual contest.

" Publication[edit] A. C. Rhétorique. Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre.


Langue_bois. Générateur de langue de bois. Deepak Chopra Mad Libs. Just-world hypothesis. The hypothesis popularly appears in the English language in various figures of speech that imply guaranteed negative reprisal, such as: "You got what was coming to you", "What goes around comes around", and "You reap what you sow".

Just-world hypothesis

This hypothesis has been widely studied by social psychologists since Melvin J. Lerner conducted seminal work on the belief in a just world in the early 1960s.[1] Research has continued since then, examining the predictive capacity of the hypothesis in various situations and across cultures, and clarifying and expanding the theoretical understandings of just-world beliefs.[2] Emergence[edit] Many philosophers and social theorists have observed and considered the phenomenon of belief in a just world.

Lerner's work made the just-world hypothesis a focus of research in the field of social psychology. Melvin Lerner[edit] Lerner's inquiry was influenced by repeatedly witnessing the tendency of observers to blame victims for their suffering. Taxonomy of the Logical Fallacies. How to Use the Taxonomy | Main Menu Acknowledgments: Thanks to David Goodey and Kent Gustavsson for pointing out missing links.

Taxonomy of the Logical Fallacies

Fallacies. Dr.


Michael C. Labossiere, the author of a Macintosh tutorial named Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0, has kindly agreed to allow the text of his work to appear on the Nizkor site, as a Nizkor Feature. It remains © Copyright 1995 Michael C. Labossiere, with distribution restrictions -- please see our copyright notice. If you have questions or comments about this work, please direct them both to the Nizkor webmasters ( and to Dr. Other sites that list and explain fallacies include: Logical Fallacies. Fallacies  Silva Rhetoricae: The Forest of Rhetoric.

Rhetoric. Painting depicting a lecture in a knight academy, painted by Pieter Isaacsz or Reinhold Timm for Rosenborg Castle as part of a series of seven paintings depicting the seven independent arts. This painting illustrates rhetorics. From Ancient Greece to the late 19th century, it was a central part of Western education, filling the need to train public speakers and writers to move audiences to action with arguments.[4] The word is derived from the Greek ῥητορικός (rhētorikós), "oratorical",[5] from ῥήτωρ (rhḗtōr), "public speaker",[6] related to ῥῆμα (rhêma), "that which is said or spoken, word, saying",[7] and ultimately derived from the verb ἐρῶ (erō), "say, speak".[8] Category:Rhetoric theorists. Figure de style.

Clé des procédés littéraires. Tout ce qui peut se faire dans le domaine des lettres: effet de style, "fleur de rhétorique", forme poétique, type d'argument, artifice romanesque, jeu de mot... se trouve ici; y compris le geste et le dessin accompagnant du texte.

Clé des procédés littéraires

Figure of speech. A figure of speech is the use of a word or a phrase, which transcends its literal interpretation.

Figure of speech

It can be a special repetition, arrangement or omission of words with literal meaning, or a phrase with a specialized meaning not based on the literal meaning of the words in it, as in idiom, metaphor, simile, hyperbole, personification, or synecdoche. Figures of speech often provide emphasis, freshness of expression, or clarity. However, clarity may also suffer from their use, as any figure of speech introduces an ambiguity between literal and figurative interpretation. A figure of speech is sometimes called a rhetorical figure or a locution. Rhetoric originated as the study of the ways in which a source text can be transformed to suit the goals of the person reusing the material. The four fundamental operations[edit] Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies. La Dialectique éristique.

Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre. Définition[modifier | modifier le code] « La dialectique éristique est l'art de la controverse. » Cet art repose sur la distinction entre la vérité objective d'une proposition et l'apparence de vérité que cette proposition peut prendre aux yeux des disputeurs et des auditeurs. Sophisme. Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre.


Un sophisme est une argumentation à la logique fallacieuse. C'est un raisonnement qui cherche à paraître rigoureux mais qui n'est en réalité pas valide au sens de la logique (quand bien même sa conclusion serait pourtant la « vraie »). À l'inverse du paralogisme, qui est une erreur dans un raisonnement, le sophisme est fallacieux : il est prononcé avec l'intention de tromper l'auditoire afin, par exemple, de prendre l'avantage dans une discussion. Fallacy. A fallacy is the use of poor, or invalid, reasoning for the construction of an argument.[1][2] A fallacious argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is.

Some fallacies are committed intentionally to manipulate or persuade by deception, while others are committed unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance. Fallacies are commonly divided into "formal" and "informal". Stephen Downes Guide to the Logical Fallacies. List of Fallacies. A fallacy is incorrect argument in logic and rhetoric resulting in a lack of validity, or more generally, a lack of soundness. Fallacies are either formal fallacies or informal fallacies. Formal fallacies[edit] Main article: Formal fallacy. Rhetological Fallacies. Culture & Education. Gabriella Coleman - Faculty Bio.

The Self-Attribution Fallacy. Intelligence? Talent? No, the ultra-rich got to where they are through luck and brutality. By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 8th November 2011 If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire. The findings of the psychologist Daniel Kahneman, winner of a Nobel economics prize, are devastating to the beliefs that financial high-fliers entertain about themselves(1). Such results have been widely replicated. So much for the financial sector and its super-educated analysts. In a study published by the journal Psychology, Crime and Law, Belinda Board and Katarina Fritzon tested 39 senior managers and chief executives from leading British businesses(3).

The psychopathic traits on which the bosses scored so highly, Board and Fritzon point out, closely resemble the characteristics that companies look for. This is not to suggest that all executives are psychopaths. This is now changing. It felt like history being made. 1.