![]() ![]() This includes defending a conclusion by appealing to irrelevant reasons, e.g., inappropriate appeal to pity, popular opinion, tradition, authority, etc. Taking irrelevant considerations into account But it is nonetheless self-defeating because calling the program “distasteful” is to pass a comment! Tung’s remark was not logically inconsistent, because what it describes is a possible state of affairs. ![]() Tung was asked about it, he replied, “I shall not comment on such distasteful programs.” Mr. Here is an actual example: A TV program in Hong Kong was critical of the Government.Someone who says, “I cannot speak any English.”.What is impossible is to utter the sentence as a true sentence (unless it is used for example in a telephone recorded message.) The statement itself is not logically consistent, since it is not logically possible for the child not to be where she is. Very young children are fond of saying “I am not here” when they are playing hide-and-seek.So the claim itself is inconsistent.Ī self-defeating statement is a statement that, strictly speaking, is not logically inconsistent but is instead obviously false. ![]() “All general claims have exceptions.” – This claim itself is a general claim, and so if it is to be regarded as true we must presuppose that there is an exception to it, which would imply that there exists at least one general claim that does not have an exception.If we should not do that, there is at least one thing that is objectively wrong. “Morality is relative and is just a matter of opinion, and so it is always wrong to impose our opinions on other people.” – But if morality is relative, it is also a relative matter whether we should impose our opinions on other people.So it can’t be the case that nothing is true or false. “One thing that we know for certain is that nothing is ever true or false.” – If there is something we know for certain, then there is at least one truth that we know.Fallacies of inappropriate presumption: cases where we have an assumption or a question presupposing something that is not reasonable to accept in the relevant conversational context.įallacies of inconsistency are cases where something inconsistent, self-contradictory or self-defeating is presented.Fallacies of insufficiency: cases where the evidence supporting a conclusion is insufficient or weak.Fallacies of relevance: cases where irrelevant reasons are being invoked or relevant reasons being ignored.Fallacies of inconsistency: cases where something inconsistent or self-defeating has been proposed or accepted.Broadly speaking, we might divide fallacies into four kinds: There are different ways of classifying fallacies. Being familiar with typical fallacies can help us avoid them and help explain other people’s mistakes. The study of fallacies is an application of the principles of critical thinking. This is why we would like to define fallacies more broadly as violations of the principles of critical thinking, whether or not the mistakes take the form of an argument. In both of these situations though, the person is making a mistake of reasoning since they are doing something that goes against one or more principles of correct reasoning. Similarly, putting forward a question with an inappropriate presupposition might also be regarded as a fallacy, but a question is also not an argument. For example, making a contradictory claim seems to be a case of fallacy, but a single claim is not an argument. In some discussions, a fallacy is taken to be an undesirable kind of argument or inference. In our view, this definition of fallacy is rather narrow, since we might want to count certain mistakes of reasoning as fallacious even though they are not presented as arguments. A belief in “round squares” is a mistake of reasoning and contains a fallacy because, if my reasoning were good, I would not believe something that is logically inconsistent with reality. On the other hand, if I believe that there are round squares I believe something that is contradictory. If I counted twenty people in the room when there were in fact twenty-one, then I made a factual mistake. Fallacies are mistakes of reasoning, as opposed to making mistakes that are of a factual nature. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |