Equivocation
From SkepticWiki
Contents |
[edit] Definition
Equivocation is an informal logical fallacy where a participant uses a word in two different senses during the same argument in such a way as to create confusion.
This is a fallacy because words have multiple meanings that may be unrelated.
[edit] Examples
Example 1:
- Antagonist: The sign said "Fine for parking," and because it was fine, I parked there.
Example 2:
- Antagonist: Feathers are light. But dark is the opposite of light, so no feathers can be dark.
Example 3:
- Antagonist: We all agree that the laws of physics exist. But the nature of laws implies a Lawgiver, therefore God exists.
Example 4:
- Antagonist: The United States is deeply concerned about the problem of illegal aliens crossing from Mexico. Therefore UFOs must exist, because otherwise where would space aliens come from?
Example 5 (real life example collected from the internet):
- Antagonist: A poker game has hands. A watch has hands. A person has hands. Therefore all must share a common ancestor, right? That's inductive reasoning. [1]
[edit] Exceptions to the Rule
Although ambiguity is often formally fallacious, it can be very effective as a rhetorical technique, where the two different meanings of a word can be used to tie a concept together and strengthen a statement. (A good example of this is Benjamin Franklin's statement, "If we don't hang together, we will hang separately.") It can also be a useful technique to avoid getting into an irrelevant argument, and keeping a discussion focused on the question at hand. For example, if one is discussing whether or not "the Bible" is divinely inspired, specifying a particular version of the Bible is not helpful; there is enough similarity between different Bibles that (rather obviously), if one is divinely inspired, they all are.
