Talk:Appeal to the law

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Include examples or not?

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I chose to include examples of this fallacy for two reasons. For one, it makes the concept a bit easier to understand, especially with those who may not be proficient with logical fallacies in general. Additionally, it seems like good consistency as many articles about similar logical fallacies also include an examples section. NicolinoChess31415926 (talk) 22:58, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic