FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » What is "Begging the Question?"

   
Author Topic: What is "Begging the Question?"
A Rat Named Dog
Member
Member # 699

 - posted      Profile for A Rat Named Dog   Email A Rat Named Dog         Edit/Delete Post 
Begging the Question.

It's been a long time since I took my introductory Logic class, so I'm a bit hazy here ... but I'm dead certain that most people who use this phrase in public discourse use it WRONG [Smile] So, could someone who is better versed in the language of formal debate define this fallacy for me?

Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
Description of Begging the Question
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pooka
Member
Member # 5003

 - posted      Profile for pooka   Email pooka         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Petitio Principii.
Awesome. So what's the difference between that and a priori?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
Basically, a priori is not a fallacy (nor is its opposite, a posteriori). Something is known a priori if it can be known by reason alone (although this assumes some unarguable axioms, at least implicitly).

However, falsely claiming something is known a priori would likely be an example of "begging the question" if the axioms being used to reach the conclusion assume the conclusion's validity.

See this for more info:

quote:
a priori / a posteriori:
Distinction among judgments, propositions, concepts, ideas, arguments, or kinds of knowledge. In each case, the a priori is taken to be independent of sensory experience, which the a posteriori presupposes. An a priori argument, then, is taken to reason deductively from abstract general premises, while an a posteriori argument relies upon specific information derived from sense perception. The necessary truth of an a priori proposition can be determined by reason alone, but the contingent truth of an a posteriori proposition can be discovered only by reference to some matter of fact. Thus, for example:

"3 + 4 = 7." is known a priori.

"Chicago is located on the shore of Lake Michigan." is known a posteriori.

Rationalists typically emphasize the importance of a priori ideas and arguments in establishing genuine knowledge on a firm foundation. Kant argued that synthetic a priori judgments are preconditions for any experience and thus provide a basis for mathematical and scientific knowledge. Empiricists, on the other hand, usually hold that all a priori propositions are merely analytic, so that we must rely on a posteriori propositions for significant information about the world. Kripke challenges even the identification of this distinction with that between the necessary and the contingent.

Recommended Reading: Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysic (Hackett, 1977) {at Amazon.com}; Albert Casullo, A Priori Justification (Oxford, 2003) {at Amazon.com}; New Essays on the A Priori, ed. by Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke (Oxford, 2000) {at Amazon.com}; A Priori Knowledge, ed. by Albert Casullo (Dartmouth, 1999) {at Amazon.com}; and Robert Greenberg, Kant's Theory of a Priori Knowledge (Penn. State, 2001) {at Amazon.com}.

Also see J. A. Brook, IEP, and John Kearns.

Dagonee
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ryuko
Member
Member # 5125

 - posted      Profile for Ryuko   Email Ryuko         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
... but I'm dead certain that most people who use this phrase in public discourse use it WRONG
Uhh, I hate to grammar nazi, but wouldn't it be incorrectly?
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
Godwin's Rule! [Big Grin]
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob_Scopatz
Member
Member # 1227

 - posted      Profile for Bob_Scopatz   Email Bob_Scopatz         Edit/Delete Post 
What does "dead certain" mean?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Chris Bridges
Member
Member # 1138

 - posted      Profile for Chris Bridges   Email Chris Bridges         Edit/Delete Post 
"Dead" has been used to mean "thorough" or "precise" in several phrases, such as "dead reckoning" and "dead shot." Dunno why, but it's a start.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post 
Wrong can be an adverb, too.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mrs.M
Member
Member # 2943

 - posted      Profile for Mrs.M   Email Mrs.M         Edit/Delete Post 
I emailed the question to Andrew, who is having a fine old time teaching logic this semester. I'll post his reply as soon as he sends it.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Paercival
Member
Member # 1408

 - posted      Profile for Paercival   Email Paercival         Edit/Delete Post 
Begging the question refers to the logical fallacy of founding a conclusion on a basis that needs as much to be proved as the conclusion itself. An example would be: democracy must be the best form of government because the majority are always right. Of course, that the majority are always right needs to be proved, so to use it to prove democracy is best is to beg the question.
Posts: 348 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
Paercival,

I think your explanation leaves out that the conclusion must be definitionally related to the supporting axiom or in some other way circular. This would be circular:

Why is democracy the best form of government?
Because it's rule by the majority.
Why is rule by the majority best?
Because it's democratic.

The proof of your example could be shown without using the word democracy - it would involve political science, an explanation of the benefits, etc. What you described is just relying on unfounded or unproven premises.

Dagonee

Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mrs.M
Member
Member # 2943

 - posted      Profile for Mrs.M   Email Mrs.M         Edit/Delete Post 
Here is what Andrew wrote in response to the original post:

quote:
Strictly speaking, I wouldn't call "begging the question" a fallacy. A perfectly sound argument can be question begging. There are varying accounts of this concept, but I take an argument to be question begging when it asserts as a premise what is really the central matter of the debate at hand.

For example, suppose I claim that your car will be almost worthless in year. You ask me for a reason why, and I say because its value will drop to nearly nothing by then. Well, my argument might be sound, but all I've done is assert what really needs to argued for in this context, since this premise touches on the important issue in this matter: why the value is likely to drop.

Whether one is begging the question is not always clear. It depends on the context, and what the parties to an argument can stipulate to as acceptable premises.

Apparently, some people use the term to describe argumentation that avoids certain issues. Sometimes, it is also used to describe an argument that simply raises additional questions. As a logic teacher, I'd be curious to know of other ways in which this term has been understood.


Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Xaposert
Member
Member # 1612

 - posted      Profile for Xaposert           Edit/Delete Post 
I think begging the question is simply asserting the conclusion in some different-sounding, but no more proven form to prove that conclusion.

[ February 24, 2004, 09:23 PM: Message edited by: Xaposert ]

Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2