Informal Logic 29 (2):215-243 (2009)

Douglas Walton
Last affiliation: University of Windsor
Five errors that fit under the category of jumping to a conclusion are identified: (1) arguing from premises that are insufficient as evidence to prove a conclusion (2) fallacious argument from ignorance, (3) arguing to a wrong conclusion, (4) using defeasible reasoning without being open to exceptions, and (5) overlooking/suppressing evidence. It is shown that jumping to a conclusion is best seen not as a fallacy itself, but as a more general category of faulty argumentation pattern underlying these errors and some related fallacies
Keywords defeasible reasoning, classification of fallacies, ignoring exceptions, secundum quid fallacy, burden of proof, errors of reasoning, suppression of evidence
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,163
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Fallacies.C. L. Hamblin - 1970 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 160:492-492.
Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation.Douglas Neil Walton - 1989 - Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation.Douglas Walton - 2005 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Similarity, Precedent and Argument From Analogy.Douglas Walton - 2010 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (3):217-246.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
93 ( #125,635 of 2,507,011 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #417,155 of 2,507,011 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes