Begging the Question

Post Reply
Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:41 pm

mistermack wrote:Depends if you count the first line as the premise, or the first two lines.
?

It doesn't depend on that. Whether taken together or alone, they are two premises, a major and minor one.

User avatar
camoguard
The ferret with a microphone
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:59 pm
About me: I'm very social and philosophically ambitious. Also, I'm chatty and enjoy getting to meet new people on or offline. I think I'm talented in writing and rapping. We'll see.
Location: Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by camoguard » Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:56 pm

I think the logic is sound. The actual truth of the statements depends on the first statement being true.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:59 pm

camoguard wrote:I think the logic is sound. The actual truth of the statements depends on the first statement being true.
That's always the case with logic. One can start with a faulty premise and then proceed perfectly logically to a completely false conclusion.

User avatar
camoguard
The ferret with a microphone
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:59 pm
About me: I'm very social and philosophically ambitious. Also, I'm chatty and enjoy getting to meet new people on or offline. I think I'm talented in writing and rapping. We'll see.
Location: Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by camoguard » Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:02 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
camoguard wrote:I think the logic is sound. The actual truth of the statements depends on the first statement being true.
That's always the case with logic. One can start with a faulty premise and then proceed perfectly logically to a completely false conclusion.
But that's the point. The structure of the concluding is one part and that is the logic. The facts that need to be checked are then listed like an outline. It's like math. You get a formula but then you actually need to use real measurements.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:05 pm

camoguard wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
camoguard wrote:I think the logic is sound. The actual truth of the statements depends on the first statement being true.
That's always the case with logic. One can start with a faulty premise and then proceed perfectly logically to a completely false conclusion.
But that's the point. The structure of the concluding is one part and that is the logic. The facts that need to be checked are then listed like an outline. It's like math. You get a formula but then you actually need to use real measurements.
That doesn't relate at all to whether one is begging the question.

One can say.

All humans are caucasion.
Obama is a human.
Therefore, Obama is a caucasian.

That's a perfectly logical syllogism. It's wrong. But, it's perfectly logical. And, it's the basic premise that is wrong. But, it doesn't beg the question (going back to the OP).

User avatar
A Monkey Shaved
Posts: 122
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by A Monkey Shaved » Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:53 pm

Some syllogisms get just get dated in the light of new evidence like for example:
All the planets orbit the Sun
Earth is a planet
Therefore the Earth orbits the Sun

The conclusion to that syllogism is still true today, but the old major premise that "all the planets orbit the Sun" is no longer valid since the indirect discovery of numerous extrasolar planets which do not orbit the sun.
Syllogisms can only be a good as the credibility of their major premise and often frequently the major premise begs the question.
Last edited by A Monkey Shaved on Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Just because more people believe Jesus is the son of God and not the son of Satan does not make it any truer.

User avatar
camoguard
The ferret with a microphone
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:59 pm
About me: I'm very social and philosophically ambitious. Also, I'm chatty and enjoy getting to meet new people on or offline. I think I'm talented in writing and rapping. We'll see.
Location: Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by camoguard » Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:59 pm

A Monkey Shaved wrote:Some syllogisms get just get dated in the light of new evidence like for example:
All the planets orbit the Sun
Earth is a planet
Therefore the Earth orbits the Sun

The conclusion to that syllogism is still true today, but the old premise that all the planets orbit the no longer true since the indirect discovery of numerous extrasolar planets which do not orbit the sun.
Syllogisms can only be a good as the credibility of their major premise and often frequently the major premise begs the question.
yeah. But we're not talking about accidentally getting something right. We're talking about repeatably using mechanics that help us focus our thinking. In this case you find out the first statement is false, therefore, you should stop there. The conclusion is not properly related to the statement.

Related to belief systems, having a god exist isn't the point. Failing to use logic means you can be right and also that you'll never have any principle to explain why it is you are right. So the rest of us should not act upon the believer's "proof".

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:07 pm

A Monkey Shaved wrote:Some syllogisms get just get dated in the light of new evidence like for example:
All the planets orbit the Sun
Earth is a planet
Therefore the Earth orbits the Sun

The conclusion to that syllogism is still true today, but the old major premise that "all the planets orbit the Sun" is no longer valid since the indirect discovery of numerous extrasolar planets which do not orbit the sun.
Syllogisms can only be a good as the credibility of their major premise and often frequently the major premise begs the question.
No, it's not begging the question. If the major premise is wrong it's wrong. A wrong premise doesn't necessarily beg the question. The premise begs the question if it assumes as true the conclusion.

Yes, not all planets orbit the sun, but that doesn't beg the question that the Earth orbits the sun. To say all planets orbit the sun is an assertion that is either wrong or not wrong, it doesn't beg any question.

User avatar
leo-rcc
Robo-Warrior
Posts: 7848
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:09 pm
About me: Combat robot builder
Location: Hoogvliet-Rotterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by leo-rcc » Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:08 pm

MrFungus420 wrote:Or the classic, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" It assumes that you have been beating your wife.
That is more a loaded question, another nice one. Whether you answer yes or no it puts you in a bad daylight regardless.
Yes implies you have done it before, No implies you are still doing it.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
My combat robot site: http://www.team-rcc.org
My other favorite atheist forum: http://www.atheistforums.org

Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you

User avatar
A Monkey Shaved
Posts: 122
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:43 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by A Monkey Shaved » Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:29 pm

camoguard wrote:
A Monkey Shaved wrote:Some syllogisms get just get dated in the light of new evidence like for example:
All the planets orbit the Sun
Earth is a planet
Therefore the Earth orbits the Sun

The conclusion to that syllogism is still true today, but the old premise that all the planets orbit the no longer true since the indirect discovery of numerous extrasolar planets which do not orbit the sun.
Syllogisms can only be a good as the credibility of their major premise and often frequently the major premise begs the question.
yeah. But we're not talking about accidentally getting something right. We're talking about repeatably using mechanics that help us focus our thinking. In this case you find out the first statement is false, therefore, you should stop there. The conclusion is not properly related to the statement.

Related to belief systems, having a god exist isn't the point. Failing to use logic means you can be right and also that you'll never have any principle to explain why it is you are right. So the rest of us should not act upon the believer's "proof".
The old major premise that "all swans are white" was a major premise that was considered beyond doubt for centuries and many people generally thought that it was in a category of syllogisms that it was "unfalsifiable" that is where they stopped - until black swans turned up in Australia
Just because more people believe Jesus is the son of God and not the son of Satan does not make it any truer.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by mistermack » Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:46 am

I think it begs the question. The conclusion is contained in the assumptions of the premise, ( or premises ). It's a syllogism that begs the question.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

Trolldor
Gargling with Nails
Posts: 15878
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:57 am
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by Trolldor » Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:47 am

Assumpyion is healthy.


ASSUMPTION without question i9s religion.
"The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don't like that statement but few can argue with it."

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by mistermack » Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:39 pm

leo-rcc wrote:
MrFungus420 wrote:Or the classic, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" It assumes that you have been beating your wife.
That is more a loaded question, another nice one. Whether you answer yes or no it puts you in a bad daylight regardless.
Yes implies you have done it before, No implies you are still doing it.
It's only a problem if the questioner demands a yes or no answer.
That's why tv journalists, and politicians in a debate, very often put their question like that.
"do you support blah blah blah, yes or no? "
It's a dishonest tactic whoever it comes from, it always makes me suspicious.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Aug 02, 2010 1:19 pm

mistermack wrote:I think it begs the question. The conclusion is contained in the assumptions of the premise, ( or premises ). It's a syllogism that begs the question.
.
It doesn't beg the question, because the conclusion is not contained in the major premise. The major premise is "all planets orbit the sun." The conclusion, "the Earth orbits the sun" is NOT assumed in that premise. We need the minor premise, "the Earth is a planet" to get to the conclusion. The conclusion is right, the major premise is wrong. But the major premise simply, flat out, does NOT beg the question.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Begging the Question

Post by mistermack » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:07 pm

I disagree.
You could write the original post on two lines just as easily as three.

It becomes " All items in group X including A, have Property Y
A has property Y"
This begs the question.
Splitting it onto three lines doesn't stop it begging the question.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests