Damning the alternatives
Merry Christmas from Milan
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Preface
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
This article originally published on Blogger 20160812, significantly revised for an entry on academia.edu 20241225 with an updated Blogger entry.
This article originally published on Blogger 20160812, significantly revised for an entry on academia.edu 20241225 with an updated Blogger entry.
Pirie
Quote:
'In cases where there is a fixed and known set of alternatives, it is legitimate to establish the superiority of one by showing all of the others to be inferior. However, in cases where the alternatives are not fixed or known, and where absolutes are not fixed or known, and where absolutes rather than comparatives are sought, it is a fallacy to suppose that we argue for one by denigrating the alternatives.' (75).
This is damning the alternatives. (75).
Example, based on the author's:
A dictatorship, such as the People's Republic of China, will claim that only their form of Marxist, communism is good for China, politically.
Quote:
'In cases where there is a fixed and known set of alternatives, it is legitimate to establish the superiority of one by showing all of the others to be inferior. However, in cases where the alternatives are not fixed or known, and where absolutes are not fixed or known, and where absolutes rather than comparatives are sought, it is a fallacy to suppose that we argue for one by denigrating the alternatives.' (75).
This is damning the alternatives. (75).
Example, based on the author's:
A dictatorship, such as the People's Republic of China, will claim that only their form of Marxist, communism is good for China, politically.
Any other form of government is a denied, political possibility. The CCP is not opening up political alternatives for public review.
In Pirie's example, he states '(And he may be proved wrong, tomorrow.)' (75).
Based on author's example:
Wales is a very good team, look at England and Scotland, they are terrible.
Other teams are not being taken into account that might be much better than Wales, and therefore Wales might not be 'very good'. If the author is referencing Rugby League or Rugby Union, as examples, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand are historically, reasonable, better alternatives than Wales.
The fallacy leaves out alternatives.(75). Relevant material is avoided. (75). It is a fallacy of the partisan. (75). It promotes one side by demoting another side. (75-76).
In Pirie's example, he states '(And he may be proved wrong, tomorrow.)' (75).
Based on author's example:
Wales is a very good team, look at England and Scotland, they are terrible.
Other teams are not being taken into account that might be much better than Wales, and therefore Wales might not be 'very good'. If the author is referencing Rugby League or Rugby Union, as examples, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand are historically, reasonable, better alternatives than Wales.
The fallacy leaves out alternatives.(75). Relevant material is avoided. (75). It is a fallacy of the partisan. (75). It promotes one side by demoting another side. (75-76).
Cited
'From Conservapedia'
'Damning the Alternatives is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone ranks favorably a certain position by selectively choosing just its pros while treating all other alternatives with bias, emphasizing solely their cons. From logical standpoint, one cannot prove that the position A is a better one or superior to others just by showing that there are difficulties with other positions. In extreme case, the alternative views are intentionally ignored completely or even suppressed and their supporters persecuted; and/or, all positive alternatives are denied and only negative is promulgated wrt. certain position.'
Cited
'Randal Hedtke (2010). Secrets of the Sixth Edition. Master Books, 57, 139. ISBN 978-0-89051-597-6.
Jane E. Miller (2004). The Chicago Guide To Writing About Numbers. The University of Chicago Press, 225. ISBN 0-226-52631-3.'
---
A logical premise can be presented in a statement/proposition. If the statement premise is not contradictory, it can be considered logical, without necessarily being reasonable or even true. A logical premise or premises, can be presented in an argument. If the premise or premises and conclusion are not contradictory, they can be considered logical, without necessarily being reasonable or even true.
From The Elements of Reasoning: Validity in deductive arguments is a technical term in logic. Elements (1997: 33). The concept of true premises and false conclusion would be 'inconceivable in a valid argument'. Elements (1997: 33). Validity is a set of premises supporting a conclusion. Technically in logic the premises do not have to be true, simply valid. Elements (1997: 33).
Therefore a valid deductive argument can have:
False premises and a true conclusion (FT)
False premises and a false conclusion (FF)
True premises and a true conclusion (TT)
However...
True premises and a false conclusion (TF) is invalid.
Valid arguments with all true premises are called sound arguments. These also have true conclusions.
Pirie explains that a conclusion must be consistent with the arguments present in support of it. (66). A conclusion must be reasonably and legitimately supported by propositions/premises.
Briefly reflecting on theology and theistic philosophy of religion
Statements/propositions supporting the Christian worldview should be logical, reasonable and true.
Premise (s) supporting the Christian worldview in an argument should be logical, reasonable, true and sound. Sound meaning that all premises and conclusion are true.
---
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.
EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973)(eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.
GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.
LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy).
PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
