search

Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Fallacy of Four Terms

quaternio terminorum

(also known as: ambiguous middle term)

Description: This fallacy occurs in a categorical syllogism when the syllogism has four terms rather than the requisite three (in a sense, it cannot be a categorical syllogism to begin with!)  If it takes on this form, it is invalid.  The equivocation fallacy can also fit this fallacy because the same term is used in two different ways, making four distinct terms, although only appearing to be three.

Logical Form: There are many possible forms, this is one example:

All X are Y.

All A are B.

Therefore, all X are B.

Example #1:

All cats are felines.

All dogs are canines.

Therefore, all cats are canines.

Explanation: When you add in a fourth term to a categorical syllogism that can only have three terms to be logically valid, we get nonsense -- or at least an invalid argument. 

Example #2:

All Greek gods are mythical.

All modern day gods are real.

Therefore, all Greek gods are real.

Explanation: Again, nonsense.  If we take away one of the terms, we end up with a valid syllogism:

All Greek gods are mythical.

All mythical gods don’t really exist.

Therefore, all Greek gods don’t really exist.

Exceptions: No exceptions.

Fun Fact: Greek gods may not exist, but Greek yogurt does.

References:

Bunnin, N., & Yu, J. (2008). The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. John Wiley & Sons.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Eat Meat... Or Don't.

Roughly 95% of Americans don’t appear to have an ethical problem with animals being killed for food, yet all of us would have a serious problem with humans being killed for food. What does an animal lack that a human has that justifies killing the animal for food but not the human?

As you start to list properties that the animal lacks to justify eating them, you begin to realize that some humans also lack those properties, yet we don’t eat those humans. Is this logical proof that killing and eating animals for food is immoral? Don’t put away your steak knife just yet.

In Eat Meat… Or Don’t, we examine the moral arguments for and against eating meat with both philosophical and scientific rigor. This book is not about pushing some ideological agenda; it’s ultimately a book about critical thinking.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book