deepstash
Beta
The Appeal to Definition Fallacy: When People Misuse the Dictionary
Appeal to definition: when the process becomes fallacious
Not every use of a definition is necessarily fallacious. If the definition is properly justified and is selected in a properly justified way, it is generally not fallacious. However, it is fallacious when at least one of the following conditions are true:
- There is no valid reason for using the definition.
- The definition was cherry-picked out of a range of possible definitions.
90 SAVES
This is a professional note extracted from an online article.
Read more efficiently
Save what inspires you
Remember anything
IDEA EXTRACTED FROM:
6
Key Ideas
The argument from dictionary
The argument from a dictionary is a logical fallacy and happens when someone's argument is based, in a problematic way, on the definition of a particular term as it appears in a dictionary. The problem with these arguments:
- Dictionaries are descriptive, meaning that they attempt to describe how people use the language. It is not prescriptive in that it instructs them how to do so in a definitive manner.
- Dictionaries don't always reflect the meaning of words as they're used by people.
- Different dictionaries can list different definitions for a given term, and may even have several definitions for the same word.
An example of the appeal to definition
"We should ignore the theory of evolution because the dictionary says that a theory is just an opinion that you have about something you can't prove."
The person using this fallacy is basing their statement on a specific definition of the word "theory" while ignoring alternative definitions that will better capture the meaning of the term as it's used in a scientific context.
Responding to an appeal to definition
When responding to appeals to definition, it is useful to know the terms denotation, which is the literal meaning of a word, and connotation, which is a feeling the word evokes beyond its denotation.
- Explain why the use of the definition is inappropriate in this case.
- Explain why the proposed definition is flawed. Other dictionaries may offer different meanings than the one your opponent has chosen.
- You can sometimes benefit from using specific and relevant examples to show why such arguments are problematic.
- You can ask the person using the fallacy to correctly justify their reasoning in light of your criticism.
Modern dictionaries
The structure and use of dictionaries have changed as new technologies developed.
- Easily available online dictionaries make it easier for people to use and cherry-pick preferred definitions in their arguments.
- Dictionaries can be quickly updated with new words or new meanings of existing words.
- Dictionaries are able to list a wider range of meanings and connotations.
Types of definitions
- Reportive definitions aim to accurately capture the meaning of a term as it's ordinarily used.
- Precising definitions add relevant criteria to a reportive definition to make it more precise for a specific purpose.
- Stipulative definitions are used to establish a specific purpose. For example, "for the purpose of the present document, the term 'contract' means..."
- A persuasive definition is a stipulative definition that is dressed up as a reportive definition or as a claim in an argument. The terms are redefined to present one's preferred definitions as facts.
- Ostensive definitions are based on examples of the word that is being described. For example, "liquid" could be "things like water and oil."
- Misleading definitions relies on misleading language so that its intended meaning is different than the meaning that most people will use.
- Operational definitions are used to define certain measures where an exact, reproducible definition is needed, such as in scientific studies.
SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:
Virtue signaling
Virtue signaling means speaking or behaving in a way that’s meant to prove a person's good moral values.
If a person affirms on social media that they fully support...
The overall negative connotation of virtue signaling
Usually, ‘virtue signaling’ has a negative meaning (even if there are a few situations where it is likely to lead to meaningful positive outcomes).
This behavior is generally defined as being mainly driven by the desire to signal your good moral values, regardless of whether it leads to a meaningful outcome or not.
Engaging in virtue signaling
Individuals can engage in virtue signaling, as can groups, companies, or governments.
Someone might even engage in virtue signaling in private, by saying things that are meant to convince themselves of their own good character.
4 more ideas
The empathy gap
The empathy gap is a cognitive bias that causes people to struggle to understand mental states that are different from their own.
When someone is happy or angry, they ...
Examples of empathy gaps
The empathy gap causes us to misjudge our own emotions and behaviors. Examples include overestimating our ability to stay composed in a stressful event, overestimating the likelihood that we can control our desire for an addictive substance, such as coffee, or underestimating how much our feelings for someone affected our judgment in the past.
The empathy gap can cause people to be unprepared for situations and act differently to what they would ideally prefer.
Types of empathy gaps
- Cold-to-hot empathy gaps. When someone is in a cold (emotionally neutral) state, they have trouble understanding someone in a hot (emotional state). A calm person might be unable to predict how they will act when they're upset.
- Hot-to-cold empathy gaps. Someone in this state might be passionate about a topic but fail to understand how other people feel that are not passionate about it.
- Intrapersonal bias. An interpersonal empathy gap occurs when someone struggles to consider their own thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.
- Interpersonal bias. An interpersonal empathy gap occurs when people battle to consider someone else's thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.
- Retrospective bias. A retrospective empathy gap occurs when people fail to understand why they acted emotionally in the past.
- A prospective bias. A prospective empathy gap occurs when people fail to predict the future behavior of someone who doesn't care about the same thing as much.
- The outgroup empathy gap. This is a cognitive bias that causes people to be more empathic towards members of their ingroup than toward people in their outgroup.
2 more ideas
6
Key Ideas
False equivalence
It is a logical fallacy and it occurs when someone incorrectly asserts that two or more things are equal because they share some characteristics, regardless of the notable differences...
The problem with false equivalence
- The equivalence exaggerates the degree of similarity. I.e, stating that two people share a specific personality trait, but ignoring that they differ in other aspects of this trait.
- The equivalence exaggerates the importance of the similarity. I.e, focusing on a personality trait that two people share while ignoring that many other people also share this trait.
- The equivalence ignores important differences.
- The equivalence ignores differences in orders of magnitude.
Responding to a false equivalence
- Show that the similarities between the things being equated are exaggerated, overemphasized, or oversimplified.
- Highlight the differences between the things being equated.
- Explain why these differences are more significant than related similarities.
- Provide counterexamples.
- Ask your opponent to justify why they believe that their equivalence is valid, and then demonstrate the issues with the reasoning they provide.
3 more ideas