You are on page 1of 16

Handouts for Introduction to Logic

FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE
Language is used in a great variety of ways, only some of which are informative. Without the intention
to inform, we may express ourselves using language. Some discourse is directive, with or without
expressive or informative elements. It seeks to guide or to command.

Informative Language – affirming or denying propositions, formulating or evaluating arguments, etc.


1. The sun is the center of the solar system.
2. One of your classmates think that Jeremiah is handsome.
Expressive Language - when used to vent or to arouse feelings or emotions
1. Do you know, how painful it is
To look you in the eye everyday
And not see my reflection
Where they once were?
2. Gugma, bungalos ka gad ha akon
Kwintas han mga kasakit nga imo ha ak ginbilin
Di ko na kinahanglan nga mabuhi
Pastilan ka nga gugma, makakawang na man la
Directive Language - intended to cause (or prevent) overt action
1. If you’re not going to study, go home and plant kamote instead!
2. Think before you click.

In reasoning it is the informative function of language that is the principal concern of logicians.
Moreover, the functions of language should not be confused with the different forms of
language, i.e. declarative, imperative, interrogative, and exclamatory.

1
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE

Exercise 1. Identify the function of language used in each statement. Write you answer on the space provided
before each number.

______________________ 1. Check the box on line 6a unless your parent (or someone else) can claim
you as a dependent on his or her tax return.
—U.S. Internal Revenue Service, “Instructions,” Form 1040, 2006
______________________ 2. ‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
—Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, 1871
______________________ 3. What traveler among the ruins of Carthage, of Palmyra, Persepolis, or Rome, has
not been stimulated to reflections on the transiency of kingdoms and men, and
to sadness at the thought of a vigorous and rich life now departed . . . ?
—G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, 1823
______________________ 4. Moving due south from the center of Detroit, the first foreign country one
is not Cuba, nor is it Honduras or Nicaragua or any other Latin American nation;
it is Canada.
______________________ 5. I was a child and she was a child,
In this kingdom by the sea,
But we loved with a love that was more than love—
I and my Annabel Lee—
—Edgar Allan Poe, “Annabel Lee,” 1849
______________________ 6. Reject the weakness of missionaries who teach neither love nor brotherhood,
but chiefly the virtues of private profit from capital, stolen from your land and
labor. Africa awake, put on the beautiful robes of Pan-African Socialism!
—W. E. B. Dubois, “Pan-Africa,” 1958
______________________ 7. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a
noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
—I Cor. 13:1
______________________ 8. I herewith notify you that at this date and through this document I resign the
office of President of the Republic to which I was elected.
—President Fernando Collor De Mello,
in a letter to the Senate of Brazil, 29 December 1992
______________________ 9. American life is a powerful solvent. It seems to neutralize every intellectual
element, however tough and alien it may be, and to fuse it in the native good will,
complacency, thoughtlessness, and optimism.
—George Santayana, Character and Opinion in the United States, 1934
______________________ 10. The easternmost point of land in the United States—as well as the northernmost
point and the westernmost point—is in Alaska.

2
Handouts for Introduction to Logic
EMOTIVE LANGUAGE, NEUTRAL LANGUAGE, AND DISPUTES

The words we use to convey beliefs may be neutral and exact, but they may also have (by accident or by
design) an impact on the attitudes of our listeners.
Emotionally colored language is appropriate in some contexts—in poetry for example—but it is highly
inappropriate in other contexts, for example, in survey research.
When parties are in dispute, the differences between them that lead to that dispute may be
disagreements in beliefs about the facts, or disagreements in attitude about facts that are actually agreed upon.
This uncertainty, and the confusion to which it can lead, may arise because the words being used in the dispute
have very different emotive meanings. To illustrate this, imagine a dispute between X and Y about legislation
authorizing the death penalty for murder. X and Y may agree or disagree about the facts: whether capital
punishment really is an effective deterrent to murder. They may also agree or disagree about whether it is right
for the state to execute criminals, whatever may be the facts about its deterrent effectiveness. So it is possible
that they could agree about factual beliefs but disagree in their attitudes, or they might agree in their attitudes
but disagree about their beliefs. It is also possible, of course, that they disagree both in attitude and in belief.
In many cases a disagreement in attitude about some event or possible outcome is rooted in a
disagreement in some belief about facts; in other cases, it is not.
One of the greatest of all football coaches and one of the greatest of all writers on sports differed
profoundly about the importance of winning.

Wrote the journalist, Grantland Rice:


For when the One Great Scorer comes
To write against your name,
He marks—not that you won or lost—
But how you played the game.

Said the coach, Vince Lombardi:


Winning isn’t everything. It’s the only thing.

Do you believe that this disagreement in attitude was rooted in a disagreement in belief?
Of course, we do not reach agreement simply by recognizing the nature of the dispute. But until we
recognize the real nature of a dispute, and the differing functions of the language used by the conflicting parties,
it is unlikely that the resolution of differences can be achieved.

3
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
EMOTIVE LANGUAGE, NEUTRAL LANGUAGE, AND DISPUTES
Exercise 2. Identify the kinds of agreement or disagreement most probably exhibited by the following pairs:
1. _____________________________________ 7. _____________________________________

a. Answer a fool according to his folly, a. Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular
Lest he be wise in his own conceit. education, without which neither freedom nor justice
—Prov. 26:5 can be permanently maintained.
b. Answer not a fool according to his folly, —James A. Garfield, 1880
Lest thou also be like unto him. b. Education is fatal to anyone with a spark of artistic
—Prov. 26:4 feeling. Education should be confined to clerks, and
even them it drives to drink. Will the world learn that
we never learn anything that we did not know before?
2. _____________________________________
—George Moore, Confessions of a Young
Man, 1888
a. A stitch in time saves nine.
b. Better late than never.
8. _____________________________________
3. _____________________________________ a. Belief in the existence of god is as groundless as it is
useless. The world will never be happy until atheism is
a. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. universal.
b. Out of sight, out of mind. —J. O. La Mettrie, L’Homme Machine, 1865
b. Nearly all atheists on record have been men of
4. _____________________________________ extremely debauched and vile conduct.
—J. P. Smith, Instructions on Christian
a. The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the Theology
strong.
—Eccl. 9:11 9. _____________________________________
b. But that’s the way to bet.
—Jimmy the Greek a. I know of no pursuit in which more real and important
services can be rendered to any country than by
5. _____________________________________ improving its agriculture, its breed of useful animals,
and other branches of a husbandman’s cares.
a. A bad peace is even worse than war. —George Washington, in a letter to John
—Tacitus, Annals Sinclair
b. The most disadvantageous peace is better than the b. With the introduction of agriculture mankind entered
most just war. upon a long period of meanness, misery, and madness,
—Desiderius Erasmus, Adagia, 1539 from which they are only now being freed by the
beneficent operations of the machine.
—Bertrand Russell, The Conquest of
6. _____________________________________ Happiness, 1930

a. The right of revolution is an inherent one. When


10. _____________________________________
people are oppressed by their government, it is a
natural right they enjoy to relieve themselves of the
a. Language is the armory of the human mind; and at once
oppression, if they are strong enough, either by
contains the trophies of its past, and the weapons of its
withdrawal from it, or by overthrowing it and
future conquests.
substituting a government more acceptable.
—Samuel Taylor Coleridge
—Ulysses S. Grant, Personal Memoirs,
b. Language—human language—after all, is little better
vol. 1
than the croak and cackle of fowls, and other
b. Inciting to revolution is treason, not only against
utterances of brute nature—sometimes not so
man, but against God.
adequate.
—Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, 1885
—Nathaniel Hawthorne, American
Notebooks, 1835

4
Handouts for Introduction to Logic
DISPUTES AND AMBIGUITY
Disputes fall into three categories.

1. Obviously genuine dispute


If A roots for Alaska, and B for Ginebra, they are in genuine disagreement, although they disagree mainly
in attitude. If C believes that Guiuan is south of Eastern Samar, and D denies this, they too are in genuine
disagreement, but in this dispute about geographic facts a good map can settle the matter.

2. Merely verbal disputes


– the apparent conflict is not genuine and can be resolved by coming to agreement about how
some word or phrase is to be understood.
F may hold that a tree falling in the wilderness with no person to hear it creates no sound, while G insists
that a sound really is produced by the falling tree. If a “sound” is the outcome of a human auditory
sensation, then F and G may agree that there was none; or if a “sound” is simply what is produced by
vibrations in the air, then they may agree that a sound was indeed produced. Getting clear about what is
meant by “sound” will resolve the disagreement, which was no more than verbal.

3. Apparently verbal but really genuine


- misunderstanding about the use of terms may be involved but when that misunderstanding has
been cleared up there remains a disagreement that goes beyond the meanings of the words.
For example, should a film in which explicit sexual activity is depicted be considered “pornography”? J
holds that its explicitness makes it pornographic and offensive; K holds that its beauty and sensitivity make
it art and not pornography. Plainly they disagree about what “pornography” means—but after that
ambiguity has been exposed, it is likely that the parties will still disagree in their judgment of that film.
Whether the film is “pornographic” may be settled by a definition of that term, but a deeper disagreement
is then likely to be exposed. The word “pornographic” plainly carries pejorative associations. J, who finds
the film objectionable, understands the word “pornographic” in one way, while K, who approves of the
film, uses the word “pornographic” differently. Does the sexually explicit content of the film make it
objectionable and thus “pornographic”? J and K differ in their uses of the word, but for both of them the
emotional meaning of the word is very negative; and they also differ about the criteria for the application
of that negative word, “pornography.”

In summary, when confronting a dispute that arises in discourse, we must first ask whether there is some
ambiguity that can be eliminated by clarifying the alternative meanings in play. If there is, then we must ask
whether clearing up that linguistic issue will resolve the matter. If it does, the dispute was indeed merely verbal.
If it does not, the dispute was genuine, although it may have appeared to be merely verbal.

5
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
DISPUTES AND AMBIGUITY

Exercise 3. Discuss each of the following disputes. If the dispute is obviously genuine, indicate each of the
disputers’ positions with respect to the proposition at issue. If it is merely verbal, resolve it by explaining the
different senses attached by the disputers to the key word or phrase that is used ambiguously. If it is an apparently
verbal dispute that is really genuine, locate the ambiguity and explain the real disagreement involved.

1. __________________________________________
Miah: Despite their great age, the plays of Sophocles are __________________________________________
enormously relevant today. They deal with eternally __________________________________________
recurring problems and values such as love and __________________________________________
sacrifice, the conflict of generations, life and death—
__________________________________________
as central today as they were over two thousand years
ago. __________________________________________
Mark: I don’t agree with you at all. Sophocles has nothing to __________________________________________
say about the pressing and immediate issues of our __________________________________________
time: inflation, unemployment, the population __________________________________________
explosion, and the energy crisis. His plays have no
relevance to today.
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
2. __________________________________________
___
. __________________________________________
__________________________________________
Miah: Tom did it of his own free will. No pressure was __________________________________________
brought to bear on him; no threats were made; no
__________________________________________
inducements were offered; there was no hint of force.
He deliberated about it and made up his own mind. __________________________________________
Mark: That is impossible. Nobody has free will, because __________________________________________
everything anyone does is inevitably determined by __________________________________________
heredity and environment according to inexorable __________________________________________
causal laws of nature.
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
3. __________________________________________
___
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
3. __________________________________________
Miah: It was in bad taste to serve roast beef at the banquet.
__________________________________________
There were Hindus present, and it is against their
religion to eat beef. __________________________________________
Mark: Bad taste, nothing! That was the tastiest meal I’ve had __________________________________________
in a long time. I think it was delicious! __________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
6 ___
Handouts for Introduction to Logic
THE STRUCTURE OF DEFINITIONS: EXTENSION AND INTENSION

A definition states the meaning of a term. When we look closely at the literal (or descriptive) meaning of a term,
however, we see that there are different senses in which that term has meaning. With those different senses
distinguished (our object just below), we will also see that definitions may be grouped and understood not only
on the basis of their functions (as in the preceding section), but in view of the way those definitions are built: their
structure.

Extension
– consists of objects to which the term may be correctly applied
– if we define the term “paper” is anything that is used in the form of thin sheets for writing or printing
on, wrapping things, etc.
– extension of paper will include photo paper, bond paper, gift wrapper, linen paper, etc.
Intension
– the attributes shared by all and only the objects in the class that a given term denotes

When attributes are added to the intension of a term, we say that the intension increases. Begin with a
general term such as “person.” Add “living.” Add “over twenty years old.” Add “born in the Philippines.” With each
such addition the intension increases; the intension of the term, “Living person over twenty years old born in the
Philippines,” is far greater than that of “person.” So these terms are given here in order of increasing intension.
However, increasing their intention decreases their extension. The number of living persons is much lower than
that of persons, and the number of living persons over twenty years old is lower still, and so on.
We use the distinction between intension and extension to explain some techniques for constructing
definitions. Some definitions approach a general term by focusing on the class of objects to which the term refers.
Some definitions approach a general term by focusing on the attributes that determine the class. Each approach,
as we shall see, has advantages and disadvantages.

7
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
THE STRUCTURE OF DEFINITIONS: EXTENSION AND INTENSION
Exercise 4.
A. Arrange each of the following groups of terms in order of increasing intension:
1. Animal, feline, lynx, mammal, vertebrate, wildcat.
_____________________________________________________________________

2. Alcoholic beverage, beverage, champagne, fine white wine, white wine, wine.
_____________________________________________________________________

3. Athlete, ball player, baseball player, fielder, infielder, shortstop.


_____________________________________________________________________

4. Cheese, dairy product, Limburger, milk derivative, soft cheese, strong soft cheese.
_____________________________________________________________________

5. Integer, number, positive integer, prime number, rational number, real number.
_____________________________________________________________________

B. Divide the following list of terms into five groups of five terms each, arranged in order of increasing intension:
Aquatic animal, beast of burden, beverage, brandy, cognac, domestic animal, filly, fish, foal, game fish, horse,
instrument, liquid, liquor, musical instrument, muskellunge, parallelogram, pike, polygon, quadrilateral, rectangle,
square, Stradivarius, string instrument, violin.

8
Handouts for Introduction to Logic
DEFINITION BY GENUS AND DIFFERENCE

Genus – the class whose membership is divided into subclasses


Species – the subclasses

Genus: Species as Parent: Offspring

Class – collection of entities having common characteristics


Difference – the attribute that distinguishes the members of that species from members of all other species

Rule 1: A definition should state the essential attributes of the species.


Rule 2: A definition must not be circular.
Rule 3: A definition must be neither too broad or too narrow.
Rule 4: Ambiguous, obscure or figurative language must not be used in a definition.
Rule 5: A definition should not be negative when it can be affirmative.

9
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
DEFINITION BY GENUS AND DIFFERENCE

Exercise 5. Construct definitions for the following terms (in the box on the left side) by matching the
definiendum with an appropriate genus and difference (from the box on the right side).

DEFINIENDUM DEFINIENS

1. banquet 11. lamb 1. offspring 1. female


2. boy 12. mare 2. horse 2. male
3. brother 13. midget 3. man 3. very large
4. child 14. mother 4. meal 4. very small
5. foal 15. pony 5. parent 5. young
6. daughter 16. ram 6. sheep
7. ewe 17. sister 7. sibling
8. father 18. snack 8. woman
9. giant 19. son 9. person
10. girl 20. stallion

Answers:

1. ______________________________________ 11. ______________________________________

2. ______________________________________ 12. ______________________________________

3. ______________________________________ 13. ______________________________________

4. ______________________________________ 14. ______________________________________

5. ______________________________________ 15. ______________________________________

6. ______________________________________ 16. ______________________________________

7. ______________________________________ 17. ______________________________________

8. ______________________________________ 18. ______________________________________

9. ______________________________________ 19. ______________________________________

10. _____________________________________ 20. ______________________________________

10
Handouts for Introduction to Logic
FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE
Fallacy – typical errors or mistakes in reasoning that exhibit a pattern that can be identified and named

Fallacies of relevance are the most numerous and the most frequently encountered. In these fallacies, the
premises of the argument are simply not relevant to the conclusion. However, because they are made to appear
to be relevant, they may deceive.

1. Appeal to Populace (Argument ad Populum)


- An informal fallacy in which the support given for some conclusion is an appeal to popular belief
2. Appeals to Emotion (Argumentum ad Misericordiam)
- A fallacy in which the argument relies on generosity, altruism, or mercy, rather than on reason.
3. The Red Herring
- A fallacy in which attention is deliberately deflected away from the issue under discussion.
4. The Straw Man
- A fallacy in which an opponent's position is depicted as being more extreme or unreasonable than is
justified by what was actually asserted.
5. Argument against the Person (Argumentum as Hominem)
- A fallacy in which the argument relies upon an attack against the person taking a position.
a. Abusive
b. Circumstantial
 Poisoning the Well
6. Appeal to Force
- A fallacy in which the argument relies upon an open or veiled threat of force.
7. Missing the Point (Ignoratio Elenchi)
- A fallacy in which the premises support a different conclusion from the one that is proposed. Also
known as “irrelevant conclusion”

11
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE
Exercise 6. Identify and explain the fallacies of relevance in the following passages:

1. Like an armed warrior, like a plumed knight, James G. Blaine marched down the halls of the American
Congress and threw his shining lances full and fair against the brazen foreheads of every defamer of his
country and maligner of its honor. For the Republican party to desert this gallant man now is worse than if
an army should desert their general upon the field of battle.
—Robert G. Ingersoll, nominating speech at the Republican National Convention, 1876
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

2. However, it matters very little now what the king of England either says or does; he hath wickedly broken
through every moral and human obligation, trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet, and by a
steady and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty procured for himself an universal hatred.
—Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

3. To know absolutely that there is no God one must have infinite knowledge. But to have infinite knowledge
one would have to be God. It is impossible to be God and an atheist at the same time. Atheists cannot
prove that God doesn’t exist.
—“Argument Against Atheism,” http://aaron_mp.tripod.com/id2.html (2007)
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

4. When we had got to this point in the argument, and everyone saw that the definition of justice had been
completely upset, Thrasymachus, instead of replying to me, said: “Tell me, Socrates, have you got a nurse?”
“Why do you ask such a question,” I said, “when you ought rather to be answering?” “Because she leaves
you to snivel, and never wipes your nose; she has not even taught you to know the shepherd from the
sheep.”
—Plato, The Republic
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

5. Clarence Darrow, renowned criminal trial lawyer, began one shrewd plea to a jury thus: You folks think we
city people are all crooked, but we city people think you farmers are all crooked. There isn’t one of you I’d
trust in a horse trade, because you’d be sure to skin me. But when it comes to having sympathy with a
person in trouble, I’d sooner trust you folks than city folks, because you come to know people better and
get to be closer friends.
—Irving Stone, Clarence Darrow for the Defense, 1943
Answer: ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

12
Handouts for Introduction to Logic

FALLACIES OF DEFECTIVE INDUCTION AND FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION


In fallacies of defective induction, which are also common, the mistake arises from the fact that the premises of
the argument, although relevant to the conclusion, are so weak and ineffective that relying on them is a
blunder.

1. Argument from ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)


- A fallacy in which a proposition is held to be true just because it has not been proven false, or false
because it has not been proven true.
2. Appeal to Inappropriate Authority (Argumentum ad Verecundiam)
- A fallacy in which a conclusion is accepted as true simply because an expert has said that it is true.
This is a fallacy whether or not the expert’s area of expertise is relevant to the conclusion.
3. False Cause (Argument non Causa pro Causa)
- A fallacy in which something that is not really the cause of something else is treated as its cause.
 Post hoc ergo propter hoc
- A fallacy in which an event is presumed to have been caused by a closely preceding
event. Literally, “After this; therefore, because of this.”
 Slippery slope
- A fallacy in which change in a particular direction is asserted to lead inevitably to
further changes (usually undesirable) in the same direction
4. Hasty generalization (Converse Accident)
- A fallacy of defective induction in which one moves carelessly from a single case, or a very few
cases, to a largescale generalization about all or most cases.

In fallacies of presumption, too much is assumed in the premises. The inference to the conclusion depends
mistakenly on these unwarranted assumptions.

1. Fallacy of accident
- A fallacy in which a generalization is mistakenly applied to a particular case to which the
generalization does not apply.
2. Complex question (Plurium Interrogationum)
- An informal fallacy in which a question is asked in such a way as to presuppose the truth of some
conclusion buried in that question.
3. Begging the question (Petition Principii)
- An informal fallacy in which the conclusion of an argument is stated or assumed in any one of the
premises. Also known as “circular argument”

13
Exercises for Introduction to Logic

FALLACIES OF DEFECTIVE INDUCTION AND FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION


Exercise 7. Identify and explain any fallacies of defective induction or of presumption in the following passages:
1. Hiroyuki Suzuki was formerly a member of the Sakaume gumi, an independent crime family in Japan
known for its role in gambling. Mr. Suzuki’s wife Mariko broke her kneecap, and when Mariko went to
church the next Sunday, the minister put his hands on her broken knee and pronounced it healed. She
walked away from church that day. Mr. Suzuki regarded her religion as a silly waste of time—but he was
fascinated by the recovery of her knee. “In gambling,” he said, “you use dice. Dice are made from bone. If
God could heal her bone, I figured he could probably assist my dice and make me the best dice thrower
in all of Japan.” Mr. Suzuki’s gambling skills did improve, enabling him to pay off his debts. He now says
his allegiance is to Jesus.
—Stephanie Strom, “He Watched over His Rackets,” The New York Times, 22 June 1999
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

2. A national mailing soliciting funds, by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), included a
survey in which questions were to be answered “yes” or “no.” Two of the questions asked were these:
“Do you realize that the vast majority of painful animal experimentation has no relation at all to human
survival or the elimination of disease?”
“Are you aware that product testing on animals does not keep unsafe products off the market?”

Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

3. In a motion picture featuring the famous French comedian Sacha Guitry, three thieves are arguing over
division of seven pearls worth a king’s ransom. One of them hands two to the man on his right, then two
to the man on his left. “I,” he says, “will keep three.” The man on his right says, “How come you keep
three?” “Because I am the leader.” “Oh. But how come you are the leader?” “Because I have more pearls.”

Answer:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

14
Handouts for Introduction to Logic
FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
The incorrect reasoning in fallacies of ambiguity arises from the equivocal use of words or phrases. Some word
or phrase in one part of the argument has a meaning different from that of the same word or phrase in another
part of the argument. Also known as a “sophism.”

1. Fallacy of Equivocation
- A fallacy in which two or more meanings of a word or phrase are used, accidentally or deliberately,
in different parts of an argument.
2. Fallacy of Amphiboly
- A fallacy in which a loose or awkward combination of words can be interpreted in more than one
way; the argument contains a premise based upon one interpretation, while the conclusion relies on
a different interpretation.
3. Fallacy of Accent
- A fallacy of ambiguity that occurs when an argument contains a premise that relies on one possible
emphasis of certain words, but the conclusion relies on a different emphasis that gives those same
words a different meaning.
4. Fallacy of Composition
- A fallacy of ambiguity in which an argument erroneously assigns attributes to a whole (or to a
collection) based on the fact that parts of that whole (or members of that collection) have those
attributes.
5. Fallacy of Division
- A fallacy of ambiguity in which an argument erroneously assigns attributes to parts of a whole (or to
members of a collection) based on the fact that the whole (or the collection) has those attributes.

15
Exercises for Introduction to Logic
FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY

Exercise 8. Identify and explain the fallacies of ambiguity that appear in the following passages:
_________________ 1. . . . the universe is spherical in form . . . because all the constituent parts of the universe,
that is the sun, moon, and the planets, appear in this form.
—Nicolaus Copernicus, The New Idea of the Universe, 1514
_________________ 2. Robert Toombs is reputed to have said, just before the Civil War, “We could lick those
Yankees with cornstalks.” When he was asked after the war what had gone wrong, he is reputed to have said, “It’s
very simple. Those damn Yankees refused to fight with cornstalks.”
—E. J. Kahn, Jr., “Profiles (Georgia),” The New Yorker, 13 February 1978
_________________ 3. To press forward with a properly ordered wage structure in each industry is the first
condition for curbing competitive bargaining; but there is no reason why the process should stop there. What is
good for each industry can hardly be bad for the economy as a whole.
—Edmond Kelly, Twentieth Century Socialism, 1910
_________________ 4. No man will take counsel, but every man will take money: therefore money is better than
counsel.
—Jonathan Swift
_________________ 5. I’ve looked everywhere in this area for an instruction book on how to play the concertina
without success.
—Mrs. F. M., Myrtle Beach, S.C., Charlotte Observer
You need no instructions. Just plunge ahead boldly.
—The New Yorker, 21 February 1977
_________________ 6. . . . each person’s happiness is a good to that person, and the general happiness,
therefore, a good to the aggregate of all persons.
—John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, 1861
_________________ 7. If the man who “turnips!” cries
Cry not when his father dies,
‘Tis a proof that he had rather
Have a turnip than his father.
—Hester L. Piozzi, Anecdotes of Samuel Johnson, 1932
_________________ 8. Fallaci wrote her: “You are a bad journalist because you are a bad woman.”
—Elizabeth Peer, “The Fallaci Papers,” Newsweek, 1 December 1980
_________________ 9. A Worm-eating Warbler was discovered by Hazel Miller in Concord, while walking along
the branch of a tree, singing, and in good view.
—New Hampshire Audubon Quarterly
That’s our Hazel—surefooted, happy, and with just a touch of the exhibitionist.
—The New Yorker, 2 July 1979
_________________ 10. The basis of logic is the syllogism, consisting of a major and a minor premise and a
conclusion—thus:
Major Premise: Sixty men can do a piece of work sixty times as quickly as one man;
Minor Premise: One man can dig a post-hole in sixty seconds; therefore—
Conclusion: Sixty men can dig a post-hole in one second.
This may be called the syllogism arithmetical, in which, by combining logic and
mathematics, we obtain a double certainty and are twice blessed.
—Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary, 1911

16

You might also like