Equivocation

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(radical formatting change)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Equivocation is a [[logical fallacy]] that involves taking a word with more than one definition and freely substituting one definition for another.
 
Equivocation is a [[logical fallacy]] that involves taking a word with more than one definition and freely substituting one definition for another.
  
For example: "A feather is light.  Therefore, a feather cannot be dark." There are two meanings of the word "light." The first sentence assumes a meaning that is the opposite of "heavy," not the opposite of "dark."
+
For example:
 +
: "A feather is light.  Therefore, a feather cannot be dark."
 +
:* There are two meanings of the word ''light''.  The first sentence assumes a meaning that is the opposite of ''heavy'', not the opposite of ''dark''.
  
This fallacy is used frequently in the service of [[apologetics]] arguments. A few examples:
+
This fallacy is used frequently in the service of [[apologetics]] arguments. A few relevant examples:
 
+
# [[Atheism is based on faith]].
# [[Atheism is based on faith]]. There are multiple meanings of the word "[[faith]]".
+
#* There are multiple meanings of the word ''[[faith]]''.
# [[No true Scotsman]] fallacy. When somebody says "So-and-so wasn't really a [[Christian]] because he did that," they are relying on ambiguity in the word "Christian".
+
# "[[No true Scotsman]]" fallacy.
# [[The existence of laws implies a law-giver]]. This stems from a confusion between natural laws and legal laws.
+
#* When someone says, "That person wasn't really a [[Christian]] because he did that," they are relying on ambiguity in the word ''Christian''.
# [[Evolution is only a theory]]. This plays on the confusion between the scientific and colloquial definitions of the word "theory".
+
# [[The existence of laws implies a law-giver]].
 +
#* This stems from a confusion between [[natural law]]s and legal laws.
 +
# [[Evolution is only a theory]].
 +
#* This plays on the confusion between the scientific and colloquial definitions of the word ''theory''.
  
 
==External Links==
 
==External Links==

Revision as of 22:04, 27 August 2006

Equivocation is a logical fallacy that involves taking a word with more than one definition and freely substituting one definition for another.

For example:

"A feather is light. Therefore, a feather cannot be dark."
  • There are two meanings of the word light. The first sentence assumes a meaning that is the opposite of heavy, not the opposite of dark.

This fallacy is used frequently in the service of apologetics arguments. A few relevant examples:

  1. Atheism is based on faith.
    • There are multiple meanings of the word faith.
  2. "No true Scotsman" fallacy.
    • When someone says, "That person wasn't really a Christian because he did that," they are relying on ambiguity in the word Christian.
  3. The existence of laws implies a law-giver.
    • This stems from a confusion between natural laws and legal laws.
  4. Evolution is only a theory.
    • This plays on the confusion between the scientific and colloquial definitions of the word theory.

External Links

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox