Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Unwarranted Assumption Fallacies

A Primary Cause of Argumentative Deficiencies in Thesis Proposals

Bibliographic Data

ID21806629
AuthorsYuliana Setyaningsih (0000-0002-8865-2454, Sanata Dharma University), R Kunjana Rahardi (0009-0007-3171-112X, Sanata Dharma University), Dian Eka Chandra Wardhana (0000-0002-8424-0153, University of Bengkulu), Ignatius Dimas Adi Suarjaya (Sanata Dharma University)
Year2026
Volume16
Issue3
Pages785-795
Publication date2026-03-17
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTheory and Practice in Language Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1799-2591 • E-ISSN: 2053-0692
PublisherAcademy Publication (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.17507/tpls.1603.08
OpenAlexW7137814618
LanguageEN

This study seeks to identify and critically examine recurring patterns of unwarranted assumption fallacies that commonly arise in the construction of arguments, particularly those rooted in hasty generalizations and the use of logically irrelevant evidence. Drawing upon a qualitative content analysis of relevant scholarly literature and selected case studies, the investigation focuses on five prominent categories of fallacious reasoning: false causality based on irrelevant premises, premature generalizations derived from insufficient or non-representative data, hastily formulated claims, immature or weakly substantiated conclusions, and arguments relying on tangential or unrelated evidence. The analytical framework emphasizes the relationship between claims and their supporting evidence, assessing how inconsistencies and logical disconnects compromise argumentative validity. The findings reveal that all five fallacy types significantly diminish the strength, coherence, and credibility of academic arguments, often leading to misleading or erroneous conclusions. False causality typically emerges from unwarranted cause-effect attributions, while hasty generalizations are frequently grounded in anecdotal or statistically unrepresentative observations. Similarly, premature claims and immature conclusions reflect a lack of critical depth in reasoning, and the use of irrelevant evidence introduces logical discontinuities that weaken argumentative structure. These insights underscore the necessity of deliberate and rigorous evidence selection, as well as methodologically sound reasoning practices, in constructing robust and persuasive academic discourse. In doing so, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of argumentative fallacies and their implications for the integrity of scholarly communication

Argumentation theory · Argumentative · Circumstantial evidence · Credibility · DECIPHER · Explication · Fallacy · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · Education and Critical Thinking Development · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae