An Alphabetical Analysis
Volume 10 - Practical Truth - Page 249 of 277
INDEX
speak for himself, and not allow his critic to assume the roles of judge,
witness and executioner as well.
The two concrete examples we have given must suffice to illustrate the
value of learning all that is possible of the many fallacious modes of
argument that the reader may encounter.  We hope that the help derived may
justify any tediousness in the explanation of a rather difficult theme.
Fallacies classified
Aristotle divided fallacies broadly into two sections: 'Verbal' and
'Non -verbal'.
Of the first class, which are not much more than verbal quibbles, he
names six varieties:
(1)
Ambiguity of words.
This is met by clear definition.
(2)
Ambiguity of structure.
Minto gives as an illustration:
'What he was beaten with was what I saw him beaten with: what I saw him
beaten with was my eye; therefore what he was beaten with was my eye'.
Under this heading would come the misinterpretation of figures of
speech, and the taking literally of what is meant figuratively, e.g. 'This is
My body'.
(3)
Illicit conjunction.
Minto gives as illustration:
'Socrates is good.
Socrates is a musician.
Therefore Socrates is a
good musician'.
Here two items are joined together in the conclusion that have no
necessary or logical relationship.
(4)
Illicit disjunction.
'Socrates is a good musician.
Therefore he is a good man'.
Of course this does not necessarily or logically follow.
Some good
musicians have been notoriously bad men.
(5)
Ambiguity of pronunciation.
We remember the following incident
that illustrates this class of fallacy:
A little boy attended school for the first time, and was told to sit in
a seat until he could be attended to.  After a while he began to cry;
upon being questioned as to his trouble, he exclaimed, 'I was told to
wait here for the present, and it has not come'.
This form of fallacy often depends on the confusing of verb and noun,
which may both sound alike.
(6)
Ambiguity of inflexion.  This is more likely to occur in a
language rich in inflexions than in one in which they have been largely
eliminated as in modern English.