Question

...

Changing the conclusion or argument

What would the fallacy be called for suggesting a conclusion that the original person didn’t suggest. Example:
Person 1 states “according to the Bible, one should not deny their spouse sex.”
Person 2 “ How dare you suggest that you the right to rape your spouse.”
asked on Saturday, Jan 12, 2019 11:24:27 AM 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."

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

...
Abdulazeez
0
that would be a misrepresentation of the argument and therefore a strawman.
answered on Saturday, Jan 12, 2019 11:30:01 AM by Abdulazeez

Comments
...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0
This would be a Strawman . Person 2 took what person 1 said and twisted it into a version that could easily be argued against.

To avoid this fallacy, person 2 should let person 1 come to that conclusion themselves. For example,

Person 1: According to the Bible, one should not deny their spouse sex.
Person 2: Does that mean, for example, that if the wife does deny the husband sex that the husband has the right to have sex with her anyway?
Person 1: Yes.
Person 2: Isn't having sex with someone without their consent, rape?
Person 1: Yes.
Person 2: So you are suggesting that one has the right to rape their spouse?
Person 1: Shit. I better rethink my beliefs.

If person 1 said "no" to the first question, then person 2 would be out of line to suggest the conclusion they did.
answered on Saturday, Jan 12, 2019 11:36:51 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Comments