Résumés
Abstract
This work is a revision of the False Dilemma Fallacy (FDF). The formalized model (FM)of this fallacy has as its centerpiece a valid disjunctive syllogism, but the disjunctive premise is presumed to be false, thus making the argument unsound. Our revised model (FM2.0) focuses on the formal structure by comparing the given vs. the real argument, which is unsound because of its invalidity. This approach we believe is more pedagogically useful and a better explanation of the fallacious nature of the FDF. It extends the identity of “formal fallacy” to the FDF. The abstract is formatted in two columns. The English abstract goes on this side.
Keywords:
- false dilemma fallacy,
- fallacies,
- disjunctive syllogism
Résumé
Ce travail est une révision du sophisme du faux dilemme (SFD). La représentation formalisée de ce sophisme a pour pièce maîtresse un syllogisme disjonctif valide, mais la prémisse disjonctive est présumée fausse, ce qui rend l'argument non fondé. Notre représentation révisée se concentre sur la structure formelle en comparant l'argument donné à l'argument réel, qui n'est pas solide en raison de son non-validité. Cette approche nous semble plus pédagogiquement utile et une meilleure explication de la nature fallacieuse du SFD. Il étend l'identité du « sophisme formel » au SFD.
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Baronett, Stan. 2019. Logic 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Butler, Judith. 2006. Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. London, New York: Verso.
- Cederblom, Jerry and David W. Paulsen. 2012. Critical reasoning: Understanding and criticizing arguments and theories. Boston: Wadsworth.
- Damer, T. Edward. 2009. Attacking faulty reasoning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
- Finocchiaro, Maurice A. 2005. Arguments about arguments: Systematic, critical and historical essays in logical theory. New York: Cam-bridge University Press.
- Finocchiaro, Maurice A. 1981. II. Fallacies and the evaluation of rea-soning. American Philosophical Quarterly 18(11): 13-22.
- Govier, Trudy. 2007. Two is a small number: False dichotomies revisit-ed. In OSSA Conference Archive.57. https://scholar.uwindwor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA7/papersand com-mentaries/57:1-10
- Hamblin, C. L. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.
- Hansen, Hans. 2020. Fallacies. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philoso-phy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. URL accessed 1 February 2023: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies
- Hurley, Patrick J. 2003. A concise introduction to logic 8th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
- Kelley, David. 2014. The art of reasoning: An introduction to logic and critical thinking 4th ed. New York, London: W.W. Norton.
- Paul, Richard and Linda Elder. 2006. The thinkers guide to fallacies: The art of mental trickery and manipulation. Dillion Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
- Schauer, Frederick. 2022. The proof: Uses of evidence in law, politics, and everything else. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- Tomić, Taeda. 2013. False dilemma: A systematic exposition. Argumen-tation 27: 347-68.
- Tomić, Taeda. 2021. The distinction between false dilemma and false disjunctive syllogism. Informal Logic 41(4): 607-39.
- Woods, John. 1992. Who cares about fallacies? In Argumentation illu-minated, eds. F. H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Antho-ny Blair and Charles A. Willard, 23-48. Amsterdam: SicSat.
- Woods, John and Douglas N. Walton. 1989. Fallacies: Selected papers, 1973-1982. Dordrecht: Foris.