Illicit Observation
Fallacies of Ambiguity
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Fallacy Name:
Illicit Observation
Alternative Names:
None
Category:
Fallacy of Ambiguity
Explanation:
Illicit Observation is actually a special type of the Fallacy of Equivocation. It is committed
when someone uses two terms as if they were negations of each other when they are not
really.
Examples and Discussion:
Here are some ways in which the fallacy of Illicit Observation can be used in arguments:
1. Child molesters are inhuman, therefore no one who molests children is a human.
One would think that this is supposed to be an observation, but it fails because the predicate (inhuman) has not actually been negated. The term human is not the negation (or contradictory) of the term inhuman. A correct formulation would be:
2. Child molesters are inhuman, therefore no one who molests children is noninhuman.
This is because the term human is being used in more the one way. As a part of inhuman, it has to do with being moral or kind because inhuman means cruel. But when it appears alone, it simply refers to a member of the species homo sapiens. A similar error is being made in this example:
3. No rocks are alive, therefore all rocks are dead.
Why is that a similar error? Because the terms alive and dead are contraries, not contradictories. A failure to distinguish between the two can lead to any number of logical errors in arguments.
If two statements are contraries, then it is impossible for both of them to be true, but it is possible for both to be false. However, if two statements are contradictories, however, it is impossible for them to both be true or for them to both be false.
The terms alive and lifeless are contradictories because everything either has life (is alive) or lacks life (is lifeless), but nothing is both alive and lifeless. The terms alive and dead are contraries because nothing can be both alive and dead, but some things might be neither (dead implies that it was once alive, but now is not). Thus, the correct formulation of #3 would be:
4. No rocks are alive, therefore all rocks are lifeless.
Because of the technical and specialized nature of the fallacy, it is unlikely that you will encounter it too often. If you do find this fallacy being used in a real-world argument, please send it in as an example.
-->