Equivocation: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:45, 2 October 2020

In logic, equivocation ('calling two different things by the same name') is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses within an argument.^[1]^[2]

It is a type of ambiguity that stems from a phrase having two or more distinct meanings, not from the grammar or structure of the sentence.^[1]

Below are some examples of equivocation in syllogisms (a logical chain of reasoning):

Since only man [human] is rational.

And no woman is a man [male].

Therefore, no woman is rational.^[1]

The first instance of "man" implies the entire human species, while the second implies just those who are male.

A feather is light [not heavy].

What is light [bright] cannot be dark.

Therefore, a feather cannot be dark.

In the above example, distinct meanings of the word "light" are implied in contexts of the first and second statements.

All jackasses [male donkey] have long ears.

Carl is a jackass [annoying person].

Therefore, Carl has long ears.

Here, the equivocation is the metaphorical use of "jackass" to imply a simple-minded or obnoxious person instead of a male donkey.

References

^ ^a ^b ^c Damer, T. Edward (21 February 2008). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments. Cengage Learning. pp. 121–123. ISBN 0-495-09506-0.
^ Fischer, D. H. (June 1970), Historians' fallacies: toward a logic of historical thought, Harper torchbooks (first ed.), New York: HarperCollins, p. 274, ISBN 978-0-06-131545-9, OCLC 185446787

[Damer2008-1] Damer, T. Edward (21 February 2008). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments. Cengage Learning. pp. 121–123. ISBN 0-495-09506-0.

[2] Fischer, D. H. (June 1970), Historians' fallacies: toward a logic of historical thought, Harper torchbooks (first ed.), New York: HarperCollins, p. 274, ISBN 978-0-06-131545-9, OCLC 185446787

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 In [[logic]], '''equivocation''' ('calling two different things by the same name') is an [[informal fallacy]] resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple [[word sense|senses]] within an argument.<ref name="Damer2008">{{cite book|author=Damer, T. Edward|title=Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-qZabUx0FmkC|date=21 February 2008|publisher=Cengage Learning|isbn=0-495-09506-0|pages=121–123}}</ref><ref>{{citation |title = Historians' fallacies: toward a logic of historical thought |publisher= HarperCollins |isbn= 978-0-06-131545-9 |date=June 1970 |location= New York |oclc= 185446787 |series= Harper torchbooks |edition= first  |first= D. H. |last= Fischer |authorlink= David Hackett Fischer |page= 274 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=VIvNG8Ect6gC&pg=305}}</ref>
-It is a type of [[semantic ambiguity|ambiguity]] that stems from a phrase having two distinct [[Meaning (linguistics)|meanings]], not from the grammar or structure of the sentence.<ref name="Damer2008"/>
+It is a type of [[semantic ambiguity|ambiguity]] that stems from a phrase having two or more distinct [[Meaning (linguistics)|meanings]], not from the grammar or structure of the sentence.<ref name="Damer2008"/>
 Below are some examples of equivocation in [[syllogism|syllogisms]] (a logical chain of reasoning):

Revision as of 15:45, 2 October 2020

See also

References