Skip to main content

Can a good argument be made with a bad premise?

Can a good argument be made with a bad premise?

Yes. This is done all the time. Not so much in science because all the practitioners know the premises and are not easily deceived. It is a part of their training. You will find the most excellent arguments made upon bad premises* in politics, political speech, and social communication. Sometimes, bad premises are the basis of demagoguery, to incite, to pass legislation, to go to war. Sometimes, we all make great arguments to others, though with an error in the premises.

Now, let’s look for a moment at the many types of bad premises.

1.     Wishful thinking, or you just hope it is so, or you think it should be so. These are deadly to the listener and the speaker. Both parties are deceived.

2.     Expressly for deception. Lawyers make their livings this way with their interpretations of the statues or perhaps what a witness has said.

3.     Vagueness is a leading cause for bad premises, as it can lead the reader or listener to believe their own varied opinions.

4.     The use of incorrect quantifiers. Example: The teen says to mom, “All the other kids have one.” Incorrect qualifiers create another source of bad premises.

5.     Using the correct premise in the wrong way. This one is more subtle, as you have accidentally misinterpreted the premise to mean or imply something else.

6.     Sometimes by negation, by stating this or that cannot be true, as we all know. Therefore, the valid argument follows.

 There are others. Most arguments can be controlled or ended by asking everyone to state their premises. Bad premises are a feature of social life. Critical thinking can help if you are vigilant, and before being swept away by the eloquence of the argument, carefully consider what the speaker assumes. Be suspicious.

 *Premise: a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion. "if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true"


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Comment.

Popular posts from this blog

Behavioral Science and Problem-Solving

I.                                       I.                 Introduction.                Concerning our general behavior, it’s high about time we all had some understanding of how we operate on ourselves, and it is just as important how we are operated on by others. This is the wheelhouse of behavioral sciences. It is a vast subject. It touches our lives constantly. It’s influence is pervasive and can be so subtle we never notice it. Behavioral sciences profoundly affect our ability and success at problem-solving, from the elementary level to highly complex wicked problems. This is discussed in Section IV. We begin with the basics of behavioral sciences, Section II, and then through the lens of multiple categories and examples, Section III. II.     ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Principles of Insufficiency and Sufficiency

   The principles we use but don't know it.  1.      Introduction . Every field, scientific or otherwise, rests on foundational principles—think buoyancy, behavior, or democracy. Here, we explore a unique subset: principles modified by "insufficiency" and "sufficiency." While you may never have heard of them, you use them often. These terms frame principles that blend theory, practicality, and aspiration, by offering distinct perspectives. Insufficiency often implies inaction unless justified, while sufficiency suggests something exists or must be done. We’ll examine key examples and introduce a new principle with potential significance. As a principle of principles of these is that something or some action is not done enough while others may be done too much. The first six (§2-6) of our principles are in the literature, and you can easily search them online. The others are relatively new, but fit the concepts in the real world. At times, these pri...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Lemming Instinct

  In certain vital domains, a pervasive mediocrity among practitioners can stifle genuine advancement. When the intellectual output of a field is predominantly average, it inevitably produces research of corresponding quality. Nevertheless, some of these ideas, by sheer chance or perhaps through effective dissemination, will inevitably gain traction. A significant number of scholars and researchers will gravitate towards these trends, contributing to and propagating further work along these established lines. Such a trajectory allows an initially flawed concept to ascend to the status of mainstream orthodoxy. However, over an extended period, these prevailing ideas invariably fail to withstand rigorous scrutiny; they are ultimately and conclusively disproven. The disheartening pattern then reveals itself: rather than genuine progress, an equally unvalidated or incorrect idea often supplants the discredited one, swiftly establishing its own dominance. This cycle perpetuates, ensurin...
Post a Comment
Read more