4 ms·
I don't think begging the question is necessarily fallacious. If one is asked to prove that P from premise P one would do it like this: 1 (1) P A [1] i.e. by
by garbagetime 6y ago
I don't think begging the question is necessarily fallacious. If one is asked to prove that P from premise P one would do it like this:
1 (1) P A [1]
i.e. by assuming what is in question, i.e. by begging the question. It's not at all fallacious.
[1] Or, in English: based on step one, step one asserts that P, by the logical rule of assumption
- twicetwice 6y agoWhere/when did you learn formal logic, if you're comfortable sharing? I ask because I feel like it's rare that I see someone using the Lemmon style of writing/displaying proofs rather than the Fitch style.
- garbagetime 6y agoNew Zealand, recently. A course run by Jack Copeland at the University of Canterbury. We used Lemmon's book (the version without the sexism etc.)
- srtjstjsj 6y agoThe fallacy isn't by proving P from P. The fallacy is in treating P as a premise when trying to prove P from other premises
- garbagetime 6y agoSo you agree that begging the question is not necessarily fallacious?