What do you think?
Rate this book
Fallacies Arising from Ambiguity
We are happy to present to the reader the first book of our Applied Logic Series. Walton's book on the fallacies of ambiguity is firmly at the heart of practical reasoning, an important part of applied logic. There is an increasing interest in artifIcial intelligence, philosophy, psychol ogy, software engineering and linguistics, in the analysis and possible mechanisation of human practical reasoning. Continuing the ancient quest that began with Aristotle, computer scientists, logicians, philosophers and linguists are vigorously seeking to deepen our understanding of human reasoning and argumentation. Significant communities of researchers are actively engaged in developing new approaches to logic and argumentation, which are better suited to the urgent needs of today's applications. The author of this book has, over many years, made significant contributions to the detailed analysis of practical reasoning case studies, thus providing solid foundations for new and more applicable formal logical systems. We welcome Doug Walton's new book to our series.
- GenresPhilosophy
307 pages, Hardcover
First published August 1, 1996
19 people want to read
About the author
Douglas N. Walton
66 books47 followersDouglas Neil Walton (PhD University of Toronto, 1972) is a Canadian academic and author, well known for his many widely published books and papers on argumentation, logical fallacies and informal logic. He is presently Distinguished Research Fellow of the Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation, and Rhetoric (CRRAR) at the University of Windsor, Canada, and before that (2008-2014), he held the Assumption Chair of Argumentation Studies at the University of Windsor. Walton’s work has been used to better prepare legal arguments and to help develop artificial intelligence. His books have been translated worldwide, and he attracts students from many countries to study with him. A special issue of the journal Informal Logic surveyed Walton’s contributions to informal logic and argumentation theory up to 2006 (Informal Logic, 27(3), 2007). A festschrift honoring his contributions, Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation: An Examination of Douglas Walton’s Theories of Reasoning and Argument, ed. C. Reed and C. W. Tindale, London: College Publications, 2010, shows how his theories are increasingly finding applications in computer science. A list of titles of many of Walton’s books is given below. Links to preprints of many of his published papers can be found on the website
http://www.dougwalton.ca
http://www.dougwalton.ca
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 9, 2018
Clear Notions on Fuzzy Thinking
Wonderful insights and cogent distinctions abound in this excellent treatise on classical texts and modern approaches to logical fallacies.
Many ambiguities rely on double word meanings, as in the example "Elizabeth Taylor Loses her Appeal". A more recent example: "Saudis Won't Behead Of UN Rights Council". More subtly, some ambiguous constructs rely on a shift of meaning of terms over time or through progression of an argument, called "apparatia" - the seeming correctness of an argument when there is a fallacy of equivocation. An interesting ambiguous formulation is "amphiboly" (dual meanings), the fallacy of an ambiguous middle where a word or phrase linking two ideas differs in intent wrt to both, as in "Dog for sale. It will eat anything and is very fond of children," or the famous announcement of the Delphic Oracle: "You will destroy a mighty kingdom" to the Athenian general Croesus, the ambiguity being that it is his own. Salespersons take note, at issue is whether the Oracle is being deliberately ambiguous or actively deceptive. in which case it is called equivocation or sophism. Grice, notes Walton, felt that the Oracle's escape clause was highly unethical, arguing for an implicit non-adversarial expectation that she ought to be honest and sincere by providing information that the listener needs to know in order to make a reasonable decision.
Chapter 4 deals with the ambiguity of ACCENT, which is more likely in text rather than a recording. Changing the emphasis to a different word or changing the statement into a question or an exclamation easily changes the meaning of a phrase. "Men ought to be kind to strangers." or "I'm wrong and you are right? I should apologize?"? 2/3rds of the texts Walton examined had dropped this kind of example, and some authors such as Copi & Cohen believed that they are not strictly fallacies. Other rhetorical traps covered include the fallacy of suppressed evidence (ie: neglecting to mention that the "right to bear arms" also requires a "well regulated militia"; and the fallacy of "special pleading" wherein a demagogue will list all vices while omitting all virtues or even presenting a virtue as if it were a vice.
Chapter 5 considers figures of speech, Aristotle's Fallacy of the Horns tends not to be well understood by today's readers, but most understand that not all statements are to be taken literally and that abstractions are not the same as concrete things. In Chapter 6 Walton examines the act of character assassination vie innuendo as a form of ambiguity. Here the speaker lays out a lingering suspicion while at the same time making a pretense of non-commitment. The allegations remain uppermost in the listener's mind while the culpability of the accuser fades. Remedies are hard to come by, though Walton advises turning the tables by exposing the tactic and attacking the audacity and credibility of the the sources.
One disappointment is that he all too quickly dismisses the study of puns, though he acknowledges their frequent use in newspaper headline. The other is that Kluwer's price (a division of Springer-Verlag) is outrageously high, even for the paperback. I used an interlibrary loan - and found the expense worthwhile. Encourage your local library system to purchase a copy.
Even with the above reservations, highly recommended!
Wonderful insights and cogent distinctions abound in this excellent treatise on classical texts and modern approaches to logical fallacies.
Many ambiguities rely on double word meanings, as in the example "Elizabeth Taylor Loses her Appeal". A more recent example: "Saudis Won't Behead Of UN Rights Council". More subtly, some ambiguous constructs rely on a shift of meaning of terms over time or through progression of an argument, called "apparatia" - the seeming correctness of an argument when there is a fallacy of equivocation. An interesting ambiguous formulation is "amphiboly" (dual meanings), the fallacy of an ambiguous middle where a word or phrase linking two ideas differs in intent wrt to both, as in "Dog for sale. It will eat anything and is very fond of children," or the famous announcement of the Delphic Oracle: "You will destroy a mighty kingdom" to the Athenian general Croesus, the ambiguity being that it is his own. Salespersons take note, at issue is whether the Oracle is being deliberately ambiguous or actively deceptive. in which case it is called equivocation or sophism. Grice, notes Walton, felt that the Oracle's escape clause was highly unethical, arguing for an implicit non-adversarial expectation that she ought to be honest and sincere by providing information that the listener needs to know in order to make a reasonable decision.
Chapter 4 deals with the ambiguity of ACCENT, which is more likely in text rather than a recording. Changing the emphasis to a different word or changing the statement into a question or an exclamation easily changes the meaning of a phrase. "Men ought to be kind to strangers." or "I'm wrong and you are right? I should apologize?"? 2/3rds of the texts Walton examined had dropped this kind of example, and some authors such as Copi & Cohen believed that they are not strictly fallacies. Other rhetorical traps covered include the fallacy of suppressed evidence (ie: neglecting to mention that the "right to bear arms" also requires a "well regulated militia"; and the fallacy of "special pleading" wherein a demagogue will list all vices while omitting all virtues or even presenting a virtue as if it were a vice.
Chapter 5 considers figures of speech, Aristotle's Fallacy of the Horns tends not to be well understood by today's readers, but most understand that not all statements are to be taken literally and that abstractions are not the same as concrete things. In Chapter 6 Walton examines the act of character assassination vie innuendo as a form of ambiguity. Here the speaker lays out a lingering suspicion while at the same time making a pretense of non-commitment. The allegations remain uppermost in the listener's mind while the culpability of the accuser fades. Remedies are hard to come by, though Walton advises turning the tables by exposing the tactic and attacking the audacity and credibility of the the sources.
One disappointment is that he all too quickly dismisses the study of puns, though he acknowledges their frequent use in newspaper headline. The other is that Kluwer's price (a division of Springer-Verlag) is outrageously high, even for the paperback. I used an interlibrary loan - and found the expense worthwhile. Encourage your local library system to purchase a copy.
Even with the above reservations, highly recommended!
Displaying 1 of 1 review