logical gaps

USAGE SUMMARY

"logical gaps" is correct and usable in written English.
You use it to refer to discrepancies between two ideas or pieces of evidence which are noticeable and which render an argument or statement illogical. For example: "The speaker's argument was full of logical gaps, making it impossible to reach any conclusion."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

13 human-written examples

This jumbled epic of absurd coincidences and logical gaps can barely track its internal mythology.

The New York Times

Rather, it is one man's attempt "to give the illusion of usefulness for some time," Mr. Lorenc said, amid the dropped glasses, imperfect service and occasional logical gaps that go with employing recovering psychotics.

The New York Times

The key strength of this model is its ability to bridge logical gaps to connect objects with context.

TechCrunch

But both Bolzano and Frege saw such appeals to intuition as potentially introducing logical gaps into proofs.

SEP

Second, an appeal to evolutionary processes in technology helps both build a consistent narrative and avoid logical gaps [62].

European Journal of Futures Research

Even on this approach, however, the text remains so full of contradictions, circular arguments, and logical gaps that it is next to impossible to interpret the argument with any assurance.

SEP

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

47 human-written examples

Nor am I denying that there may be a logical gap between established scientific results and specific policy decisions.

The New York Times

The other opportunity emerges from the logical gap in the UK, and in varying degrees across Europe, between official commitment to austerity in the name of deficit reduction, and the return to political favour of public investment in infrastructure.

The Guardian

As Haidt's lone hero among the great philosophers — David Hume — points out, there is a logical gap between what is done (descriptive ethics) and what ought to be done (normative ethics).

The New York Times

He explained that the court's earlier ruling, in 1985, had created a "logical gap" in the law: while damages were forbidden to parents of unborn children who died because of malpractice, they were allowed in cases where babies were born injured.

The New York Times

Again, given the definition of knowledge above, this kind of argument is sound, because it shows that there is a logical gap between knowledge claims about the external world and the sense experiences that can be adduced as evidence to support them.

Encyclopedia Britannica

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When identifying "logical gaps", be specific about where the gaps occur and how they impact the overall argument or narrative.

Common error

Avoid exaggerating the impact of "logical gaps". While they may weaken an argument, they don't automatically invalidate it. Analyze the extent to which the gaps affect the conclusion.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "logical gaps" functions as a noun phrase, typically serving as the object of a verb or the subject of a clause. It denotes the absence of logical connections or reasoning within an argument, narrative, or system. Examples in Ludwig demonstrate its use in various contexts.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

Science

41%

News & Media

41%

Wiki

8%

Less common in

Formal & Business

3%

Encyclopedias

3%

Reference

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "logical gaps" is a commonly used and grammatically correct term that refers to breaks or inconsistencies in reasoning. As Ludwig AI confirms, it's used across diverse contexts, including news, science, and general writing. To use the phrase effectively, be specific about where the gaps occur and how they impact the overall argument. Remember that while they may weaken an argument, they don't automatically invalidate it.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

reasoning flaws

Highlights errors in the reasoning process, rather than just missing connections.

flaws in reasoning

Similar to "reasoning flaws", but emphasizes the flawed aspect of the reasoning.

inconsistencies in the argument

Focuses on contradictions within a specific argument.

breaks in the chain of reasoning

Emphasizes a disruption or discontinuity in the logical sequence.

shortcomings in logic

Draws attention to deficiencies or inadequacies in the logical structure.

lack of coherence

Indicates a general absence of logical connection and clarity.

deficiencies in reasoning

Highlights inadequate reasoning skills or processes.

evidentiary gaps

Points to missing or insufficient evidence to support a claim.

missing links in reasoning

Like breaks, this emphasizes the absence of necessary steps in logic.

illogical leaps

Refers to jumps in reasoning that are not logically supported.

FAQs

How can I identify "logical gaps" in an argument?

Look for unsupported claims, inconsistencies between premises and conclusions, and missing evidence. Asking "why" after each statement can help reveal potential "logical gaps".

What are some alternatives to saying "logical gaps"?

Depending on the context, you could use phrases like "reasoning flaws", "flaws in reasoning", or "inconsistencies in the argument".

Are "logical gaps" always a sign of a weak argument?

Not necessarily. While they weaken an argument, they don't automatically invalidate it. The severity depends on the context and how crucial the missing links are to the overall conclusion.

How do "logical gaps" differ from factual errors?

"Logical gaps" refer to flaws in reasoning, where the connections between ideas are missing or weak. Factual errors, on the other hand, involve incorrect or false information.