Petitio principii
(Difference between revisions)
(polishing a bit, but I'm still unsatisfied -- see talk) |
(reformat) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''Begging the question''', which goes by the technical name '''petitio principii''', is a [[logical fallacy]] that occurs when an [[argument]] implicitly assumes its conclusion. | '''Begging the question''', which goes by the technical name '''petitio principii''', is a [[logical fallacy]] that occurs when an [[argument]] implicitly assumes its conclusion. | ||
| − | For example, consider the following | + | For example, consider the following exchange: |
| − | + | : Q: How do you know the [[Bible]] is correct? | |
| − | + | : A: Because it was written by [[God]]. | |
The answer begs the question, "How do you know that God wrote it?" (Note that if the answer is, "Because it says so in the Bible," then this is an example of [[circular reasoning]].) | The answer begs the question, "How do you know that God wrote it?" (Note that if the answer is, "Because it says so in the Bible," then this is an example of [[circular reasoning]].) | ||
Revision as of 12:36, 5 April 2007
For more information, see the Wikipedia article:
Begging the question, which goes by the technical name petitio principii, is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument implicitly assumes its conclusion.
For example, consider the following exchange:
The answer begs the question, "How do you know that God wrote it?" (Note that if the answer is, "Because it says so in the Bible," then this is an example of circular reasoning.)
Grammar note
People often refer to "begging the question" when they really simply mean "raising another question". For example:
- "You say that theism makes more sense than atheism, but that just begs the question of which religion I should choose to believe."
This is not an appropriate use of the term, since the question being raised is not implicit in the preceding statement.
