Sophistical RefutationsAristotle

The Sophistical Refutations is Aristotle's treatise on fallacies: arguments that appear valid but are not. It serves as a companion to the Topics, extending the study of dialectical reasoning to its pathological cases.

Aristotle classifies fallacies into two groups. Fallacies dependent on language include equivocation, amphiboly, combination, division, accent, and figure of speech. Fallacies independent of language include accident, the consequent, begging the question, false cause, many questions treated as one, and ignoratio elenchi (missing the point). For each type, Aristotle explains how the appearance of validity is produced and how the fallacy can be exposed.

The work's originality lies in treating sophistical argument as a subject for systematic analysis rather than mere denunciation. Plato attacked the Sophists morally; Aristotle dissects their techniques logically. A sophistical refutation is not a refutation at all but only appears to be one, and the trained dialectician can identify the precise point at which the appearance breaks down. The catalogue of fallacies Aristotle provides became the foundation for the study of informal logic and remains in use, with modifications, in logic textbooks today. The treatise also reflects Aristotle's broader conviction that reasoning is a skill that can be taught, practiced, and improved through the identification and correction of error.