MODR 1760 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Strawperson, Begging, Fallacy

• School: York University
• Department: Modes Of Reasoning
• Course: MODR 1760
• Professor: Hila Cohen

Document Summary

Appeal to ignorance -> (cid:449)e do(cid:374)"t ha(cid:448)e the k(cid:374)o(cid:449)ledge, therefore (cid:449)e (cid:272)a(cid:374)"t dra(cid:449) a (cid:272)o(cid:374)(cid:272)lusio(cid:374) Violates (cid:271)urde(cid:374) of proof e(cid:448)ery si(cid:374)gle ti(cid:373)e (that it"s the jo(cid:271) of the arguer to gi(cid:448)e the other perso(cid:374) reasons for believing their argument) In a court of law this is different innocent until proven guilty. ***a+ answer -> use the term circular reasoning, and that it offers no independent evidence: begging the question in general form. The logical equivalence or definitional form -> the premises restate the conclusion using other words. The interdependence form -> the truth of the premises depend on the conclusion. Problem because your reasons are supposed to support your conclusion not the other way around: question begging epithet. Descriptive labels that presume the truth of the conclusion under debate: complex/loaded question. Involves phrasing the question in such a way that answering it commits the other person to a certain hidden presumption. Fallacy of equivocation (probably most common fallacy on exam)