 |
| Margam Abbey & Castle: trekearth |
Google Informed Me Someone Tried to Hack Into This Website
Very early this morning, Google/Blogger notified me that someone tried to sign in to this website, and that I was required to create a new website password.
I went to bed and dealt with it when I awoke; risk taker that I am.
But my trillion dollar philosophical question is:
Why try and hack into this website? There is no money in it.
If someone posts negative material on this site, with the assistance of Google/Blogger, I will remove it, and that will be that..,
All the articles are archived.
Concealed Quantification
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
Quote
'When statements are made about a class, sometimes they are made about all the members of it, sometimes about some of them, and at other times it is not clear which is referred to.' (64).
The fallacy of concealed qualification occurs when ambiguity of expression allows for a misunderstanding in regard to the quantity which is spoken of. (64).
Pirie's example
'Garage mechanics are crooks'. (65).
All of them? Or some of them?
Those named Chucky wear glasses.
All of them? Or some of them? Then there is the fictional evil doll, that does not...
The ambiguity involved with this fallacy is a significant reason I use the terms 'some' and 'often' in my writing. I was negatively critiqued and reviewed during my British PhD writing for using the term 'some' instead of being more affirmative with assertions and propositions. However, now viewing this documented fallacy, I reason my careful approach to assertions and propositions is academically and philosophically supported, at least some of the time, that is....
Pirie explains that this fallacy condemns entire groups based on some of their members. (65).
My example:
Evangelical Christians are right-wing, fundamentalists.
Not true, I am not, and virtually every local Pastor I know is not.
The author explains that this fallacy is used to make weak cases, supposedly look stronger. (66).
This seems a definite ambiguity type of fallacy.
