|
|
Fallacy name of jumping from definition of x to "x doesn't exist"?I'm in a debate class, and we're doing a logical fallacy unit. Basically, we need to make an argument with logical fallacies (not factual inconsistencies) and point them out in our partner's. In my case, our resolution is Resolved: Men are Men. I'm con; men are not men. One of my arguments is as follows;
1.(Illogical quote that states men are women). 2. Men are women. 3. Because men are defined as women, men don't exist. I want to know what the fallacy between 2 and 3 is. Why is jumping from a definition to 'men don't exist' fallacious? |
| asked on Thursday, Nov 07, 2019 05:03:22 PM by Arden | |
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."
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.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
|
This seems like a logical error, not a problem with reasoning per se. If A = B then A does not exist only if B does not exist . If B exists, then A must exist. Saying A does not exist can be seen as a non-sequitur by saying that it simply does not follow.
|
| answered on Thursday, Nov 07, 2019 05:15:39 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD |
Comments |
|
| |
