More on Non-Fallacies
Wednesday, 28. June 2006, 01:14:02
As noted, in an argument, a conclusion is claimed to logically follow from the truth of other statements, termed "premises." Hence, an argument consists of a minimum of two statements. Consequently, a statement, by itself, does not constitute an argument. Moreover, a series of statements by themselves, without a claimed logical connection, should not be considered an argument.
When a captious critic does not adhere to the principle of charity, it's common to impute fallacious reasoning to an author. For example, consider the following compound statement:
A critic might easily attribute the fallacy of Slippery Slope to this passage.
The Slippery Slope fallacy is succinctly defined in the Wikipedia as
The fallacy occurs if there is no necessary connection in the series of events leading to the feared final event.
So, the critic might reconstruct Lynne Truss's argument as follows:
(1) Correct punctuation is disappearing.
(2) The disappearance of correct punctuation indicates a shift in attitudes.
(3) This shift in attitudes results in widespread carelessness among people.
(4) Widespread careless leads to disastrous results for all concerned.
The argument that (1) leads to (2) and, in turn, to (3) and finally (4) would be an instance of the Slippery Slope fallacy. However, this argument was not intended by Truss's compound statement.
Her statement is best taken as two observations, exaggerated for rhetorical effect:
(1) The disappearance of punctuation ... indicates an enormous shift in our attitude to the written word.
(2) Nobody knows where it (i.e., the shift) will end.
The word "and" connects clauses of equal status. If she had thought the latter statement followed from the first, then the latter statement would be preceded by a conclusion indicator such as "thus," "hence," or "therefore."
Often, persons trained in logic and critical reasoning mistakenly attribute errors in reasoning to persons who pique interest when writing with emotive significance.
When a captious critic does not adhere to the principle of charity, it's common to impute fallacious reasoning to an author. For example, consider the following compound statement:
(Lynn Truss, Eats, Shoots & Leaves (New York: Gotham Books, 2004), xxvi.)The disappearance of punctuation ... indicates an enormous shift in our attitude to the written word, and nobody knows where it will end.
A critic might easily attribute the fallacy of Slippery Slope to this passage.
The Slippery Slope fallacy is succinctly defined in the Wikipedia as
"Slippery Slope," Wikipedia (June 27, 2006) URL=<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope>... an argument for the likelihood of one event or trend given another. Invoking the "slippery slope" means arguing that one action will initiate a chain of events that will lead to a (generally undesirable) event later.
The fallacy occurs if there is no necessary connection in the series of events leading to the feared final event.
So, the critic might reconstruct Lynne Truss's argument as follows:
(1) Correct punctuation is disappearing.
(2) The disappearance of correct punctuation indicates a shift in attitudes.
(3) This shift in attitudes results in widespread carelessness among people.
(4) Widespread careless leads to disastrous results for all concerned.
The argument that (1) leads to (2) and, in turn, to (3) and finally (4) would be an instance of the Slippery Slope fallacy. However, this argument was not intended by Truss's compound statement.
Her statement is best taken as two observations, exaggerated for rhetorical effect:
(1) The disappearance of punctuation ... indicates an enormous shift in our attitude to the written word.
(2) Nobody knows where it (i.e., the shift) will end.
The word "and" connects clauses of equal status. If she had thought the latter statement followed from the first, then the latter statement would be preceded by a conclusion indicator such as "thus," "hence," or "therefore."
Often, persons trained in logic and critical reasoning mistakenly attribute errors in reasoning to persons who pique interest when writing with emotive significance.
WIDGETIZE