Difference between revisions of "Argumentum ad populum"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by Shjt (talk) to last revision by DavidE)
(expanded, taking into account this month's events)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
'''Argumentum ad populum''' (''appeal to the people'') is a [[logical fallacy]] that concludes that a position is true because many or all people believe it.  i.e: "If many believe so, it is so."  Other names for this are appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people, argument by consensus, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy, and tyranny of the majority. As an example, homosexuals argue that because same-sex "marriage" is increasingly accepted, it must be moral.
+
'''Argumentum ad populum''' (''appeal to the people'') is a [[logical fallacy]] that concludes that a position is true because many or all people believe it.  i.e: "If many believe so, it is so."  Other names for this are appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people, argument by consensus, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy, and tyranny of the majority.
 +
 
 +
As an example, homosexuals argue that because same-sex "marriage" is increasingly accepted and indeed has the approval of voters in three states, it must be moral.  That article is fallacious because morality is not determined by a popular vote.
  
 
[[Category:Logical Fallacies]]
 
[[Category:Logical Fallacies]]

Revision as of 13:32, November 28, 2012

Argumentum ad populum (appeal to the people) is a logical fallacy that concludes that a position is true because many or all people believe it. i.e: "If many believe so, it is so." Other names for this are appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people, argument by consensus, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy, and tyranny of the majority.

As an example, homosexuals argue that because same-sex "marriage" is increasingly accepted and indeed has the approval of voters in three states, it must be moral. That article is fallacious because morality is not determined by a popular vote.