When it comes to fallacy I decided to ask my homemate to give me a example in order I could analyze it to fallacy. Below is the example:
Behzad argues:
Cheese is food.
Food is delicious.
Therefore, cheese is delicious.
This argument claims to prove that cheese is delicious. This particular argument has the form of a categorical syllogism. Any argument must have premises as well as a conclusion. In this case we need to ask what the premises are—that is, the set of assumptions the proposer of the argument can expect the interlocutor to grant. The first assumption is almost true by definition: cheese is a foodstuff edible by humans. The second assumption is less clear as to its meaning. Since the assertion has no quantifiers of any kind, it could mean any one of the following:
All food is delicious.
Most food is delicious.
To me, all food is delicious.
Some food is delicious.
In all but the first interpretation, the above syllogism would then fail to have validated its second premise. Amir may try to assume that his interlocutor believes that all food is delicious, if the interlocutor grants this then the argument is valid. In this case, the interlocutor is essentially conceding the point to Amir. However, the interlocutor is more likely to believe that some food is disgusting, such as a frog's liver white chocolate torte; and in this case Amir is not much better off than he was before he formulated the argument, since he now has to prove the assertion that cheese is a unique type of universally delicious food, which is a disguised form of the original thesis. From the point of view of the interlocutor, Amir commits the logical fallacy of begging the question.
Cheese is food.
Food is delicious.
Therefore, cheese is delicious.
This argument claims to prove that cheese is delicious. This particular argument has the form of a categorical syllogism. Any argument must have premises as well as a conclusion. In this case we need to ask what the premises are—that is, the set of assumptions the proposer of the argument can expect the interlocutor to grant. The first assumption is almost true by definition: cheese is a foodstuff edible by humans. The second assumption is less clear as to its meaning. Since the assertion has no quantifiers of any kind, it could mean any one of the following:
All food is delicious.
Most food is delicious.
To me, all food is delicious.
Some food is delicious.
In all but the first interpretation, the above syllogism would then fail to have validated its second premise. Amir may try to assume that his interlocutor believes that all food is delicious, if the interlocutor grants this then the argument is valid. In this case, the interlocutor is essentially conceding the point to Amir. However, the interlocutor is more likely to believe that some food is disgusting, such as a frog's liver white chocolate torte; and in this case Amir is not much better off than he was before he formulated the argument, since he now has to prove the assertion that cheese is a unique type of universally delicious food, which is a disguised form of the original thesis. From the point of view of the interlocutor, Amir commits the logical fallacy of begging the question.
No comments:
Post a Comment