Opinion vs Failure to Elucidate

An example given of the Failure to Elucidate fallacy is, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

It's a simple statement, but doesn't give us any clues as to what the argument - if there is one - is. Hence, we get a fallacy according to Dr Bo.

When do we move from a statement of opinion, then, to this fallacy?

asked on Tuesday, Jul 14, 2020 08:39:21 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

0	Bryan writes: It's not given as an example, it's given as a tip, which is that you should ask what the person's missing argument is rather than waste time guessing what it is. I agree with the tip, but it's not clear to me where it fits with the fallacy, as it isn't presented as a statement, followed by an explanation which is more confusing than the statement.
	posted on Tuesday, Jul 14, 2020 08:49:45 PM

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

What I had in mind when writing that was the initial argument, "Guns aren't a problem" or some similar claim, which is then "clarified" as "guns don't kill people, people kill people." It is the idea of moving from a basic stance to a meme, rather than a basic stance to clear argument. (I will update the page to "elucidate") :)

answered on Wednesday, Jul 15, 2020 06:00:18 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories

Comments

0	Bryan writes: That closing comment caused a right belly laugh
	posted on Thursday, Jul 16, 2020 09:57:18 AM

	1	Bo Bennett, PhD writes: [To Bryan] Right, how ironic that I failed to elucidate the tip on the failure to elucidate page.
		[ login to reply ] posted on Thursday, Jul 16, 2020 10:08:06 AM

0	DrBill writes: "guns don't kill people, people kill people." A stitch in time saves nine An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure Just to explore how you distinguish a "saying" from a "meme" Franklin's fame? A personal choice? Seems to me all three are true.
	posted on Thursday, Jul 16, 2020 02:21:25 PM

	0	Bo Bennett, PhD writes: [To DrBill] It is not about truth. Fallacies are about reasoning. If one is attempting to clarify (elucidate) one's position, it must become more clear rather than less clear.
		[ login to reply ] posted on Thursday, Jul 16, 2020 03:12:15 PM