The word end may mean either goal or last event both

Info icon This preview shows pages 7–9. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This argument is fallacious because two different senses of the word “end” are confused in it. The  word end may mean either  “goal”  or “ last event.”  Both meanings are of course legitimate. But what is illegitimate is to confuse the two, as in this argument. The premises are plausible only when the  word “end” is interpreted differently in each of them, as:  “the goal of a thing is its perfection, ”  and  “death is the last event of life.”  A special kind of equivocation has to do with “relative terms, which have different meanings in  different contexts. For example the word  tall  is a relative word; a tall man and a tall building are in  quite different categories. 4. Fallacy of Composition Fallacy of composition is applied to two closely related types of invalid argument. a)      The first may be described as reasoning fallaciously from the properties of the parts of the  whole to the properties of the whole itself. For example to argue that since every part of a particular machine is light in weight, the machine as  a whole is light in weight is to commit this fallacy.
Image of page 7

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
b)      The second type of composition fallacy is parallel to the above. Here the fallacious reasoning  is from properties possessed by individual elements or members of a collection to properties  possessed by the collection or totality of those elements. For example, it is fallacious to argue that because a bus uses more gasoline than an automobile,  therefore all buses use more gasoline than all automobiles. This turns on confusion between the  “distributive” and “collective” use of general terms The fallacy of division is the reverse of the fallacy of composition. It is of two varieties too; a)      the first kind consists in arguing that what is true of a whole must also be true of its parts. To argue that a certain corporation is very important, and Dr. Namwamba is an official of that  corporation, therefore Dr. Namwamba is very important, is to commit the fallacy of division.     b)      The second type of division fallacy is committed when one argues from the properties of a  collection of elements to the properties of elements themselves. To argue that since university students study medicine, law, engineering, dentistry and architecture,  therefore each or even, any student at the university studies the same would be to commit the  fallacy of division. Important to note: The learner should be able to see clearly the difference between the  fallacy of composition  and that  of  converse accident (hasty generalisation).
Image of page 8
Image of page 9
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern