Question

...
Steven Flax

What is the logical fallacy operating here? (Please see below.)

"Research shows that even very young children have a natural tendency to help other people solve their problems. So self-dealing is not only not good, it is not natural."
asked on Thursday, Jan 11, 2018 04:57:25 PM by Steven Flax

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."

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

Answers

...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0

First we have the statement / premise:

Research shows that even very young children have a natural tendency to help other people solve their problems.



Working under the assumption that this is factually true, we move to the conclusion drawn from this:

So self-dealing is not only not good, it is not natural.



Here are the problems with this:

1. We are defining "self-dealing" as the opposite of very young children helping other people solve problems. This can be the definist fallacy .

2. Unless there was more to this argument, we never established that self-dealing is not good; we simply asserted it. This would be an unwarranted assertion.

3. We are jumping to the conclusion that because we help people, that people helping themselves is "unnatural." This is like saying that because my wife likes to touch my penis, that masturbation is "unnatural." It does not follow - a non-sequitur.

I really hope for the sake of humanity that this was a YouTube comment or something similar, rather than an actual argument by someone who should know better.

answered on Thursday, Jan 11, 2018 05:16:58 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments