Logic established the laws and rules of such thinking, with which you can establish the truth. However, errors may occur in any logical construction. They can be divided into involuntary and conscious, and, more precisely, into paralogisms and sophisms.
Inattention error
Paralogism is an unconscious violation of the rules of logic, due to inattention or misunderstanding. From ancient Greek the term is translated as incorrect reasoning due to a false conclusion.
Aristotle at one time divided paralogisms into three main categories - errors in the very basis of evidence, in its method, as well as the substitution of arguable theses.
Now the value of paralogism established by Immanuel Kant is used. According to Kant, paralogism is a wrong conclusion in form, regardless of the truth of its content. He also singled out transcendental paralogism, which was defined as a false conclusion, having a basis in the nature of human thinking. In other words, classified as philosophical errors.
Intentional mistake
Sofisms, unlike paralogisms, are intentional logical errors, the purpose of which is to confuse the opponent in the dispute, to give out a false statement as true.
Such errors are not immediately noticeable, but the opponent is distracted from the main one and switches his attention to minor and minor details.
The term "sophism" originated in Ancient Greece, where sophistry as the ability to win in disputes was considered a special art. Antique sophists used specially thought-out logical errors and violations, as well as other elements of psychological influence on listeners. They considered the truth relative. Only the opinion was important to them in the dispute.
Sophisms were also used to justify absurd and paradoxical phenomena. Absurdity is called something ridiculous and illogical. Paradoxes arise as a result of lack of clarity, the inconsistency of certain generally accepted principles.
Examples
So, paralogism is an incorrect logical conclusion and reasoning. Often, it can be used to prove something that cannot be proved, at least in this way.
A striking example of paralogism is the way of thinking of some jealous husbands. Suppose a wife likes the color blue. Based on this, the husband concludes that the wife is cheating on him with a friend who wears a blue suit.
Another jealous claims that his wife is cheating on him with a neighbor from the lower floor. Because, hanging clothes on the balcony, the wife dropped the bra on the neighbor’s balcony. The husband believes that this was intentional, from here he draws his conclusion.
Here it is necessary to cite several sophisms in order to understand their difference from other logical errors. For example, can an object have some property and not be simultaneously? In sophistry about honey, one asks another question: "Is honey both sweet and yellow?" Obviously, the answer is yes. Is yellow color sweet? No, yellow is savory. Hence the conclusion that honey is sweet and yellow, but because yellow is unsweetened, it means that honey can be both sweet and unsweetened at the same time. Or an example about a dog. Your dog and he is the father. Conclusion: the dog is your father.
Thus, sophism and paralogism are phenomena of thought that stimulate and develop logic.