Re: OT: Pre-Conceptual Science

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:32:48 -0800, "Michael"
<muirhead@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>John Husvar wrote:
>
>> In article <1138475875.497549.198300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> "Sylv" <Sylv772003@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Tick;
>>>
>>> Good one!
>>>
>>> I don't remember what the logical fallacy is called, but starting
>>> with a conclusion is NOT science!
>>>
>>> Sylvia
>>
>> Begging the Question, or circular reasoning/argument, IIRC.
>
>Among plain-speaking people, it's usually called "propagandizing" and/or
>"justifying faith". :-)
>

A theory is a conclusion stated in the form of a question which can be
put to the rigors of a test(s).

Donn
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Pre-Conceptual Science
    ... > John Husvar wrote: ... >>>I don't remember what the logical fallacy is called, ... >>>a conclusion is NOT science! ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.support.mult-sclerosis)
  • Re: OT: Pre-Conceptual Science
    ... John Husvar wrote: ... >> Tick; ... >> I don't remember what the logical fallacy is called, ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.support.mult-sclerosis)
  • Re: 51 Scientific Facts Disproving the Bible
    ... Good point on the logical fallacy but I'll post this link anyway. ... don't need science to disprove the Bible. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ever have the urge to...
    ... John Husvar wrote: ... > Try to run one of those trucks off the road; ... (photo taken a few months ago, 7 miles from home) ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.support.mult-sclerosis)
  • Re: OT: Pre-Conceptual Science
    ... I don't remember what the logical fallacy is called, ... a conclusion is NOT science! ... Sylvia ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.support.mult-sclerosis)