Petitio principii
(fix link) |
(remove/alter theist POV; keep another change by same editor) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
: A: Because it was written by [[God]]. | : A: Because it was written by [[God]]. | ||
| − | The answer begs the question, "How do you know that God wrote it?" | + | The answer begs the question, "How do you know that God wrote it?" |
| − | + | Note that if the answer to this question is, "Because it says so in the Bible," then this is an example of [[circular reasoning]]. If, however, the answer involves a discussion of how the Bible has been "confirmed" scientifically, archaeologically, historically, and/or prophetically, then depending on the evidence presented this may be a case of [[non-sequitur]] reasoning, [[cherry picking]], or being just plain wrong. | |
==Grammar note== | ==Grammar note== | ||
Revision as of 12:59, 7 October 2008
Begging the question, which goes by the technical name petitio principii, is a logical fallacy (technically, an informal 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 to this question is, "Because it says so in the Bible," then this is an example of circular reasoning. If, however, the answer involves a discussion of how the Bible has been "confirmed" scientifically, archaeologically, historically, and/or prophetically, then depending on the evidence presented this may be a case of non-sequitur reasoning, cherry picking, or being just plain wrong.
Grammar note
People often refer to "begging the question" when they really simply mean "raising another question". For example:
- "You say that atheism makes more sense than theism, but that just begs the question of which religion/philosophy 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.
