In the English language, "begging the question" is commonly used interchangeably with "raising a question," leading to widespread confusion. But the term actually refers to a specific logical fallacy, despite its misleading name.
Begging the question occurs when an argument assumes its conclusion to be true without providing evidence. This can be seen in the following example:
Upon closer examination, this argument is flawed because it assumes the premise of the lion population being over 500,000 without actually verifying its accuracy. This is the essence of begging the question.
To fully understand the fallacy of begging the question, one must understand the concepts of validity and soundness in arguments. An argument is valid if the conclusion logically follows from the premises. However, for an argument to be sound, it must not only be valid but also have true premises.
In the example of the lion population, the argument is valid because the conclusion follows from the premise. However, it is not sound since the premise is not true. In reality, there are only around 25,000 lions worldwide. This demonstrates how an arguer assumes a premise to be true without verifying its accuracy, resulting in a logical fallacy.
Instead of blindly accepting a premise as true, it is important to verify its soundness before using it to draw a conclusion. This is why begging the question is considered a logical fallacy.
People often commit the fallacy of begging the question due to ignorance or making assumptions without evidence. Here is an example of someone using "begging the question" incorrectly:
In this example, there is no premise being assumed, making it an incorrect use of the phrase. A better way to use it would be:
Here, there is a clear premise ("the defense system cannot hit the spaceship") and a conclusion ("the pilot will fly over it"). By assuming the premise to be true, the arguer is committing the logical fallacy of begging the question.
Another reason why "begging the question" is often misused is because it was mistranslated from the Greek phrase "τὸ ἐξ ἀρχῆς" which means "asking for the first thing." In medieval times, it was translated into Latin as petitio principii, meaning "assume the conclusion." The final mistranslation into English resulted in the term "begging the question."
Understanding the Importance of Questionable Statements (Article)
Now that we have a better grasp on what a questionable statement is and how to effectively use it, it is crucial to recognize its presence in written work. Here is an excerpt from an essay that contains a questionable statement.
The plot of the story is convoluted and confusing. The story portrays love as the most dangerous emotion experienced by the characters. Thus, it is unsurprising that when Nicol expresses his anger at the end of the story, it is brushed off by the other king. On page 302, the king simply shakes his head. On the second to last page, page 334, Nicol's lover rejects him when he tries to approach her. She says, "We cannot learn to love now; that bird has flown." The threat of love stifles her feelings.
Can you spot the questionable statement?
The passage raises the question, is love truly the most perilous emotion in this story?
When analyzing a story, it is crucial to establish the "danger of love," as this sets the foundation for the events that occur. The assumption that love is dangerous should not be overlooked, as failing to acknowledge this can lead to incomplete and flawed interpretations. In the short story "Nicol's Lover," the essayist neglects to address this underlying theme, resulting in a weak analysis.
In order to effectively connect the dots and avoid making assumptions, the writer must thoroughly analyze the cause and effect relationships in the story. This includes referencing past relationships, conflicts between characters, and negative attitudes towards love expressed throughout the story. By providing evidence to support the premise that love is dangerous, the interpretation of events at the end of the story will be more convincing and well-rounded.
To avoid making this mistake, writers should utilize the following checklist:
When it comes to rhetorical fallacies, it is important to understand the difference between circular reasoning and begging the question. While they may seem similar at first glance, there are distinct differences between the two.
Begging the question involves assuming a premise to be true in order to support an argument. For example, "Jane shouldn't have to speak in public, because she is too shy to do so." The begged question here is, "Is Jane truly too shy to speak in public?"
On the other hand, circular reasoning is when an arguer uses a premise to justify itself. In the example, "Jane is too shy to speak in public, because she avoids it whenever possible. This is significant because avoiding public speaking is evidence of shyness," the statement "Jane is too shy to speak in public" is ultimately justified by the same premise.
It is important to note that circular reasoning is a type of begging the question, as the same premise is assumed to be true, thus begging the question of its validity. However, this is not always the case, as most instances of begging the question do not involve circular reasoning.
Begging the question should not be confused with a loaded question, which is a complex question designed to trap the respondent. Unlike begging the question, a loaded question does not assume the truth of a premise, but rather poses a loaded assumption within the question, making it difficult to answer without appearing guilty.
Prentzel, Olivia. "Where Lions Once Ruled, They Are Now Quietly Disappearing." 2019.
What exactly does it mean to "beg the question?" This common rhetorical fallacy involves an arguer assuming the truth of their argument in order to justify their conclusion. While it may be used to persuade an audience, it is ultimately seen as an invalid tactic in arguments. However, it is important to distinguish between this fallacy and a loaded question, as they have key differences. Let's explore the nature of begging the question and why it should be avoided in effective writing.
In the world of debates and arguments, two logical fallacies often cause confusion - begging the question and complex questions. Both involve assumptions and questions, but they differ in their underlying premises. Let's delve deeper into these concepts to better understand their differences.
When someone begs the question, they are assuming their conclusion is true without providing any evidence or reasoning to support it. Essentially, the arguer is trying to persuade their audience without valid support for their claim. On the other hand, a complex question is one that is posed with implicit assumptions or a false premise. It aims to trap the person being asked into a specific response, rather than seeking genuine understanding or discussion.
Now, back to the original question: is begging the question always considered an invalid argument? The answer is yes. By assuming the truth of their argument without offering any evidence or reasoning, the arguer is essentially trying to trick their audience into accepting their conclusion without valid support. It is a faulty and deceptive tactic that can mislead others into accepting an invalid argument as truth.
So, why do people still use this fallacy? While there may be various reasons, ignorance is often a contributing factor. People may make assumptions and draw conclusions based on those assumptions, even though they may not be true. This can be a dangerous and misleading tactic in arguments, as it can manipulate the audience's understanding and acceptance of the argument.
Begging the question is a logical fallacy that is best to be avoided in any argument. By understanding the difference between this fallacy and a complex question, and being aware of its deceptive nature, we can better evaluate arguments and avoid being misled by this invalid tactic. Remember, a genuine argument should be supported by valid evidence and reasoning, not just assumptions and loaded questions.
