Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Missing the point fallacies

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Gur7ad.JPG
1000uio.jpg

MIssing the point fallacies have in common a general failure to prove that the conclusion is true.

Petitio Princippi (Begging the Question)

This fallacy occurs when the premises are at least as questionable as the conclusion reached. The truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises. Often, the conclusion is simply restated in the premises in a slightly different form. In more difficult cases, the premise is a consequence of the conclusion. Typically the premises of the argument implicitly assume the result which the argument purports to prove, in a disguised form.\

For example:

"The Bible is the word of God. The word of God cannot be doubted, and the Bible states that the Bible is true. Therefore the Bible must be true.
"Since I'm not lying, it means that I'm telling the truth."

Begging the question is similar to Circulus in Demonstrando, where the conclusion is exactly the same as the premise.

Ignoratio Elenchi (Irrelevant Conclusion)

This fallacy consists of claiming that an argument supports a particular conclusion when it actually has nothing logically to do with that conclusion. It is also an argument which purports to prove one thing but instead proves a different conclusion. For example:

"A student may begin by saying that he will argue that the teachings of Bodhidharma are undoubtedly true. If he then argues at length that the teaching are of great help to many people, no matter how well he argues, he will not have shown that the teachings are true. Sadly, these kinds of irrelevant arguments are often successful, because they cause people to view the supposed conclusion in a more favorable light."

"I say we should support affirmative action. White males have run the country for 500 years. They run most of government and industry today. You can't deny that this sort of discrimination is intolerable." (The author has proven that there is discrimination, but not that affirmative action will end that discrimination.

Straw Man

The author attacks an argument which is different from, and usually weaker than, the opposition's best argument. For example:

"We should have conscription. People don't want to enter the military because they find it an inconvenience. But they should realize that there are more important things than convenience."

Source

tkdtutor.com