#176202 - 04/22/08 07:13 AM
Re: Begging the question of logical fallacies
[Re: Faldage]
|
latishya
member
Registered: 11/24/07
Posts: 109
|
Neither Stephen nor I meant to assert anything about the existence of any god nor about the prevalence of any specific argument.
I'd also like to add that some people posting to this thread seem to need a humour transfusion. The link I posted was obviously fun and light-hearted, but drew dense, long-winded and numbingly earnest responses from all but Faldage and tsuwm, with the added "bonus" of a sermon/borderline religious rant thrown in. I think this is the sort of situation where my English teachers would have said that it was appropriate to use the idiom, "lighten up people".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176210 - 04/22/08 09:43 AM
Re: Begging the question of logical fallacies
[Re: Faldage]
|
The Pook
addict
Registered: 02/20/08
Posts: 471
Loc: Tasmania
|
Neither Stephen nor I meant to assert anything about the existence of any god nor about the prevalence of any specific argument. That particular example was merely offered as an example of the fallacy in question. If you want to discuss the rationality of any argument about the existence of God I would suggest Internet Infidels.
I don't want to discuss the existence of God here, no, and I never said that you did "assert anything about the existence of any god" etc. I was only commenting on the topic AFAIAC.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176234 - 04/22/08 03:52 PM
Re: Begging the question of logical fallacies
[Re: The Pook]
|
Alex Williams
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 01/05/01
Posts: 1712
Loc: Spam Factory
|
The web page I pinked to earlier in Miscellany has a good entry for begs the question:
An argument that improperly assumes as true the very point the speaker is trying to argue for is said in formal logic to “beg the question.” Here is an example of a question-begging argument: “This painting is trash because it is obviously worthless.” The speaker is simply asserting the worthlessness of the work, not presenting any evidence to demonstrate that this is in fact the case. Since we never use “begs” with this odd meaning (“to improperly take for granted”) in any other phrase, many people mistakenly suppose the phrase implies something quite different: that the argument demands that a question about it be asked—raises the question. If you’re not comfortable with formal terms of logic, it’s best to stay away from this phrase, or risk embarrassing yourself.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176244 - 04/22/08 08:02 PM
Re: Begging the question of logical fallacies
[Re: Alex Williams]
|
Faldage
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 11424
|
The web page I pinked to earlier in Miscellany has a good entry for begs the question: Since we never use “begs” with this odd meaning (“to improperly take for granted”) in any other phrase, many people mistakenly suppose the phrase implies something quite different: that the argument demands that a question about it be asked—raises the question. If you’re not comfortable with formal terms of logic, it’s best to stay away from this phrase, or risk embarrassing yourself.[/color]
And I say that if you can't take the fact that a phrase which bears little resemblance to its original meaning has been taken over by folks who don't care what the original meaning is and use it in their own way to mean something completely different from its original meaning then drop the use in its archaic meaning and substitute something that does mean what you want it to mean, e.g., 'assuming the consequent' or call it by the Latin petitio principii and baffle those who commit the fallacy.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176257 - 04/23/08 05:58 AM
Re: Begging the question of logical fallacies
[Re: Faldage]
|
The Pook
addict
Registered: 02/20/08
Posts: 471
Loc: Tasmania
|
The web page I pinked to earlier in Miscellany has a good entry for begs the question: Since we never use “begs” with this odd meaning (“to improperly take for granted”) in any other phrase, many people mistakenly suppose the phrase implies something quite different: that the argument demands that a question about it be asked—raises the question. If you’re not comfortable with formal terms of logic, it’s best to stay away from this phrase, or risk embarrassing yourself.[/color] And I say that if you can't take the fact that a phrase which bears little resemblance to its original meaning has been taken over by folks who don't care what the original meaning is and use it in their own way to mean something completely different from its original meaning then drop the use in its archaic meaning and substitute something that does mean what you want it to mean, e.g., 'assuming the consequent' or call it by the Latin petitio principii and baffle those who commit the fallacy.
I agree, give the saying over to its popular use and employ something that everyone understands. I think the term "circular argument" or "circular reasoning" is as good as any - it conveys very succinctly and unambiguously the meaning of the phenomenon in lay terms. Although... perhaps it might be good to baffle your opponents with Latin instead. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#176275 - 04/23/08 04:52 PM
Re: Begging the question of logical fallacies
[Re: etaoin]
|
latishya
member
Registered: 11/24/07
Posts: 109
|
Maybe Aramis is just being nice.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
6475 Members
16 Forums
12023 Topics
176762 Posts
Max Online: 853 @ 10/23/07 11:39 AM
|
|
0 registered
and 144 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Search FAQ
_________________________
