The critical evaluation of the argumentations or of the argumentative chains implies both the analysis of arguments as well as the use of the varied methods of each argumentation technique category. Such an endeavor which is neither final nor easy to achieve, strives to outline, often in a similar way to the demonstration examination manner, whether or not the grounding of the thesis was performed according to the requirements of accurateness. Not always such requirements are observed. The qualification of some argumentations as “erroneous” or ”faulty” or the consideration there of as “logic juggling” and “logical tricks” leads us to our topic – The Traps of Argumentation or the sophism in the argumentative practice. The sophism (sophisma in Old Greek or fallacia in Latin) has the meaning of “trick”, “cheat” and points to a series of logical errors found in the practice of idea justification through demonstrations or argumentations, irrespective if they are deliberate or not.

Go to top