 |
Edited for an entry on academia.edu on September 1, 2022
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
The Definitional Retreat
'A definitional retreat takes place when someone changes the meaning of the words in order to deal with an objection raised against the original wording. By changing the meaning, he turns it into a different statement.'
Pirie uses an example: 'When I said I hadn't been drinking, officer, I meant that I hadn't had more than I get through in a normal social evening.' (77-78).
My examples:
When I said I was a Christian, I meant that I think there is probably a God.
'A definitional retreat takes place when someone changes the meaning of the words in order to deal with an objection raised against the original wording. By changing the meaning, he turns it into a different statement.'
Pirie uses an example: 'When I said I hadn't been drinking, officer, I meant that I hadn't had more than I get through in a normal social evening.' (77-78).
My examples:
When I said I was a Christian, I meant that I think there is probably a God.
When I said you were fat, I meant that you were phat, as in excellent.
The author explains that a definitional retreat allows a person to save face when their argument has been demonstrated to significantly lack merit. (78).
Pirie reasons that philosophers often change definitions when shown as questionable. (78).
Definitions are not to be subjective, they have objective meanings.
This is a reason I revise my writing, because sometimes corrections have to be made in premises, conclusions and reasoning. Definition twisting, does not assist with my pursuit of the truth. My revisions are documented when significant. I admit that minor revisions are often made after publish, because some problems are not apparent until after publish. That is a visual issue, not an integrity one.
The author explains that a definitional retreat allows a person to save face when their argument has been demonstrated to significantly lack merit. (78).
Pirie reasons that philosophers often change definitions when shown as questionable. (78).
Definitions are not to be subjective, they have objective meanings.
This is a reason I revise my writing, because sometimes corrections have to be made in premises, conclusions and reasoning. Definition twisting, does not assist with my pursuit of the truth. My revisions are documented when significant. I admit that minor revisions are often made after publish, because some problems are not apparent until after publish. That is a visual issue, not an integrity one.
But if I do change my mind...it is better to revise statements and/or arguments when needed and to note it.
Pirie mentions that UK finance ministers are good at the use of this fallacy. (79). They use definitional retreat.
I think politicians often use fallacies when definitions are changed to portray a different story. Statistics can be stated to mean one thing in January and something else in December.
Definist fallacy
Blackburn defines a similar type of fallacy:
'The illicit insistence on defining a term in a way that is favourable to one's own side of an argument.' (96). I take this point, but it is also possible that with the use of objective reasoning, one's own definition is not fallacious. But, a term should be not twisted. One can insist that a definition based on a true premise (s) and conclusions is sound.
Logical Fallacies
Definist fallacy
'Description: Defining a term in such a way that makes one’s position much easier to defend.
Logical Form: A has definition X. X is harmful to my argument. Therefore, A has definition Y.
Example #1: Before we argue about the truth of creationism, let’s define creationism as, “The acceptance of a set of beliefs even more ridiculous than those of flat-earthers.”
Example #2: Before we argue about the truth of creationism, let’s define evolution as, “Faith in a crackpot theory that is impossible to prove with certainty.”'
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
I think politicians often use fallacies when definitions are changed to portray a different story. Statistics can be stated to mean one thing in January and something else in December.
Definist fallacy
Blackburn defines a similar type of fallacy:
'The illicit insistence on defining a term in a way that is favourable to one's own side of an argument.' (96). I take this point, but it is also possible that with the use of objective reasoning, one's own definition is not fallacious. But, a term should be not twisted. One can insist that a definition based on a true premise (s) and conclusions is sound.
Logical Fallacies
Definist fallacy
'Description: Defining a term in such a way that makes one’s position much easier to defend.
Logical Form: A has definition X. X is harmful to my argument. Therefore, A has definition Y.
Example #1: Before we argue about the truth of creationism, let’s define creationism as, “The acceptance of a set of beliefs even more ridiculous than those of flat-earthers.”
Example #2: Before we argue about the truth of creationism, let’s define evolution as, “Faith in a crackpot theory that is impossible to prove with certainty.”'
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.
LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy).
LOGICAL FALLACIES, References:
BUNNIN, N., & Yu, J. (2008) The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy, John Wiley & Sons.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Definist-Fallacy
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
