answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

An absurd conclusion is one that lacks logic, reason, or evidence to support it. It is often seen as irrational or unlikely based on the information available. It can also be described as a nonsensical or comical conclusion that does not align with common sense.

User Avatar

AnswerBot

5d ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What is a absurd conclusion?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Philosophy

Is a paradox an absurd conclusion that follows from an argument that appears to be good?

A paradox is a statement or situation that leads to a contradiction or illogical conclusion. It can arise from seemingly sound reasoning but results in an incongruity that challenges common sense or logic.


What is a basis for a conclusion?

A basis for a conclusion is the evidence, facts, or reasoning that supports the conclusion being drawn. It is the foundation upon which the conclusion is built and is used to demonstrate the validity and soundness of the conclusion.


What makes something a syllogism?

A syllogism consists of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. It is a formal scheme of a logical argument. Syllogisms can result in true conclusions correctly drawn, or they might lead to absurd or subtlely wrong conclusions for several different reasons that are part of the study of logic. For example:Light is the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum.Jane's lunch was light.Therefore, Jane's lunch was the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum.Or,Each element has a unique atomic number.Carbon is an element.Therefore, carbon has a unique atomic number.


What is the baseword for conclusion?

The base word for conclusion is "conclude."


What is taking an opponent's argument to its illogical conclusion?

Taking an opponent's argument to its illogical conclusion, also known as reductio ad absurdum, involves extending their argument to an extreme or absurd scenario to highlight its flaws or logical inconsistencies. This technique aims to demonstrate that following the opponent's argument leads to unreasonable or nonsensical outcomes.