|
|
Kafka Trap Fallacy?I wanted to mention that the published book does not contain a fallacy called, "The Kafka Trap". It is a logically fallacy where if y denies being x, it is taken as evidence that y is x because only, "y would deny being x". An example of this can be similar when someone appeals to ignorance, "Mike said that he is an FBI Agent, but only an FBI Agent would hide their identity, therefore Mike is an FBI Agent".
However, there are different argumentative forms of this where you don't appeal to ignorance for example, "Mike knows he is a sexist, because only a racist would deny being sexist". I was just wondering on whether this was already mentioned? |
| asked on Thursday, Dec 30, 2021 03:36:12 PM by | |
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
|
Note the bold part of the quote. That's the assumption the conclusion rests on - and it is a false assumption! It effectively states that the only reason to deny an accusation is if you are actually guilty. This is blatantly incorrect; an innocent person is also likely to deny an accusation against them, because they wish to establish and prove their innocence of the wrongdoing in question. So there is a reason other than the one mentioned in the claim to deny an accusation; thus, the assumption is not correct. In a syllogism: P1) Only a sexist would deny being sexist P2) Mike denied being sexist C) Mike is a sexist This is a valid argument, but, as we discussed above, P1 is false, so the conclusion is not implied by any of its preceding premises!
|
|||
| answered on Thursday, Dec 30, 2021 07:05:35 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | ||||
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
||||
Comments |
||||
| ||||
|
|
I am pretty sure your kafka trap fallacy is actually a form of conspiracy theory fallacy. Of course there is no evidence that X is up to something, because obviously being up to something X concealed/hid all the evidence. |
| answered on Friday, Dec 31, 2021 08:33:28 AM by GoblinCookie | |
GoblinCookie Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
