Talk:False equivalence/Archive 1

(Partial) Merge with False Balance?

The media/journalism meaning of False Equivalence has a synomym in False Balance, which has its own article (also see discussion on talk page there). Now what? The Seventh Taylor (talk) 15:05, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, so the media/journalism part has been merged with False Balance, but whence the other part , about false equivalence in logic? The Seventh Taylor (talk) 10:14, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

The original article about "false equivalence" has been restored.

FYI Please Be Aware that "False Balance" is NOT "False Equivalence". "False Balance" is what happens when the media fails to avoid the fallacy of Middle Ground.

Please do not conflate "False Equivalence" and "False Balance".

Please make sure this article is not merged with "False Balance" again.

"False Equivalency" is a logical fallacy that happens when two things that are not the same, are presented as being the same or "equivalent", when they are not.

Examples Bacha Bazi and Catholic sex abuse cases can be presented as being the same thing because both are horrific child abuse. This is false equivalence. Both are horrific, but one is accepted as the norm, done publicly, and allowed by the culture it is resident in. The other is done very secretly and kept hidden by its transgressor as long as possible. And when found out the activity is greatly reviled by the society it is resident in. Jjk (talk) 19:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Needs references, but this is a much better topic than what I merged. Thargor Orlando (talk) 22:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

oppose merge; NOT the same thing, as the above commentor has stated. ironically, the rationale for the merger proposal is itself a kind of "false equivalence". xD Lx 121 (talk) 16:54, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Removing bad "in other words"

This topic has nothing to do with the phrase "Correlation does not imply causation", so I'm replacing that sentence. Nathan hawks (talk) 00:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

False analogy

In Dutch the literal translation of false analogy and false equivalance are used interchangeably. I think there is a minor difference between the two terms in English; false equivalence is a more logical/mathematical term and false analogy a more rhetorical term. Could somebody shed ligth on this difference? False analogy has more Google Books hits than false equivalence, so it might make sense to rename the article. Femkemilene (talk) 10:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

False analogy currently redirects to Argument from analogy, which is probably appropriate. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:30, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Maybe these articles should be merged. The difference between te two terms seems rather small to me. Femkemilene (talk) 16:19, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Argument from analogy is a type of inductive reasoning, while False equivalence is a logical fallacy. And while inductive reasoning is the base of statistics, logical fallacies are incorrecr reasoning that is only usefull for decieving people.

Sisima70 (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

STRONGLY oppose merge; equivalence & analogy are 2 clearly different things. the mere fact that they "overlap" on being "false" don't make then "the same". :p Lx 121 (talk) 16:45, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

re: proposed "equivocation" merge

someone has also stuck a tag on equivocation, suggesting it be merged here; so, for the record:

strong oppose merge. NOT the same thing; which really should be obvious, from reading & comparing the 2 articles.

Lx 121 (talk) 16:59, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

oppose merge. The whole concept of "false equivalence" seems quite new and very poorly reasoned, and has nothing to do with equivocation in any case. Lunkwill (talk) 07:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)