Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

Why reinvent the wheel? The manual's target audience understands what an AND operation is, so it makes more sense to say "The values are ANDed together" than "A logical Boolean operation is performed on the values".


1

You don't necessarily need a verb. Conjunct and conjunctive are both adjectives for this. Instead of: These values are anded together. Try: These values are conjunct. or These values are conjunctive.


3

Logically speaking, the verb conjoin really should be acceptable. A conjunction is the act or product of conjoining. It's the same stem, so if one form is deemed sufficiently precise to refer to the operation, why shouldn't the other be? The counterpart, for "or-ing", would be disjoin. Conjunction has a more specific meaning in propositional logic than in ...


0

Why not to combine ? (as suggested by Wiktionary.) And: (logic, transitive) To combine (a value) with another value by means of this operator. 2006, Gary R Wright, W Richard Stevens, The Implementation If an internal node is encountered that contains a mask, the search key is logically ANDed with the mask and another search is made of the ...


2

As others have rightly pointed out, this isn't strictly a fallacy unless used as the premise for an argument--typically, it's more like a bias. Searching Google for "agency bias" yields much better results, including multiple academic articles such as this one. "Agency bias" or "bias toward agency" appears to be the accepted term. Perhaps in cases where ...


2

The fallacy is called the agency fallacy. I first came across the agency fallacy in a series of audio lectures on evolutionary psychology by Allen MacNeill ('Evolutionary psychology' from 'The Great Courses' audio series available for download on Audible). I'm pretty sure Ben Shermer references it in his book 'Why people believe weird things' too. As an ...


4

To propose it formally then: Pathetic fallacy, the "the attributing of human emotion and conduct to all aspects within nature. It is a kind of personification that is found in poetic writing when, for example, clouds seem sullen, when leaves dance, when dogs laugh, or when rocks seem indifferent." Also somewhat strangely referred to as "anthropomorphic ...


-1

Perhaps you could try furtive fallacy (Wikipedia), whose meaning is much more restricted compared to what you're describing. The furtive fallacy is an informal fallacy of emphasis in which outcomes are asserted to have been caused by the malfeasance of decision makers


1

This is usually discussed under the label 'the semantic scope of negation'. If you use curly brackets to enclose a semantic unit, this becomes clear. Your first meaning has the semantic structure {not + {John came}} + {because of the rain}, and the second has the semantic structure {not + {John came because of the rain}}. As Jim noted, the meaning is often ...


1

The ambiguity occurs because of the way that adjectives bind to the (normally) closest phrase. Consider a parallel: I still have sand in my shoes from Hawaii. What is from Hawaii? The sand or the shoes? (Edit 1. Note that there is an ambiguity in the sentence that does not involve negation.) When I read the example, the first interpretation came to ...



Top 50 recent answers are included