Question

...
Jim

Words interchanged

What is the fallacy called when two different words are used as if they are synonymous?

Example:

P1: Everything that exists must have a cause.
P2: The universe exists.

C: The universe was created.

1& 2 are fine. But, then, in the conclusion "caused" was replaced by created, as if they are synonymous, but they're not. Is this a logical fallacy, or just intellectual dishonesty?

asked on Thursday, Jun 27, 2019 11:32:33 AM by Jim

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."

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

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

...
mchasewalker
0
I'm not addressing the syllogism itself, but responding to the overall question by referring you to
Dr. Bo's:

Ambiguity Fallacy
(also known as: ambiguous assertion, amphiboly, amphibology, semantical ambiguity, vagueness)

Description: When an unclear phrase with multiple definitions is used within the argument; therefore, does not support the conclusion. Some will say single words count for the ambiguity fallacy, which is really a specific form of a fallacy known as equivocation.

Logical Form:

Claim X is made.

Y is concluded based on an ambiguous understanding of X.

Equivocation: a fallacy of ambiguity that sneakily changes a definition or sense of a keyword during a discussion.

answered on Thursday, Jun 27, 2019 11:37:22 AM by mchasewalker

Comments
...
Bo Bennett, PhD
0
This would be a simple non-sequitur as the conclusion does not follow.
answered on Thursday, Jun 27, 2019 11:50:28 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD

Comments
...
Bill
0
Dr. Bo is right. The argument switches one word for a different word that means something else. "Cause" and "created" don't mean the same thing. To be valid, the syllogism must use the same words in the conclusion as the premise and must not switch their meanings. (That's where "ambiguity" comes in; see Walker's answer.

Also, the premise that everything that exists must have a cause is a metaphysical question, not a logical question. Note that at least some quantum physicists would probably argue that the premise is factually untrue. Here's one link:

https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html
answered on Thursday, Jun 27, 2019 12:19:52 PM by Bill

Comments
...
Bill
0
And, yes, Jim, although you didn't use a bunch of fancy philosophical terms, your analysis is dead on target. Good work.
answered on Thursday, Jun 27, 2019 12:24:16 PM by Bill

Comments