Zum Inhalt springen

Association Fallacy

aus Wikipedia, der freien Enzyklopädie
Dies ist eine alte Version dieser Seite, zuletzt bearbeitet am 27. August 2007 um 04:23 Uhr durch 68.73.202.206 (Diskussion). Sie kann sich erheblich von der aktuellen Version unterscheiden.

An association fallacy is a inductive formal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. The two types are sometimes referred to as guilt by association and honor by association. Association fallacies are a special case of red herring, and can be based on an appeal to emotion.

Form

In notation of First-order logic, this type of fallacy can be expressed as (∃xS:φ(x))→ (∀xS:φ(x)), meaning "if there exists any x in the set S so that a property φ is true for x, then for all x in S the property φ must be true."

Premise A particular thing A is a B
Premise A is also a C
Conclusion Therefore, all Cs are Bs
The form of an association fallacy
The form of an association fallacy


Guilt by association

Vorlage:See also for legal and ethical aspects

Examples

Some syllogistic examples of guilt by association are:

  • Knut attracted people who took pictures. The people also took pictures of Pan Pan, killing him. Knut killed Pan Pan.
  • In the BBC sitcom Yes, Prime Minister, the wordplay-prone Sir Humphrey Appleby commits the logical fallacy All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog.

Guilt by association as an ad hominem fallacy

Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a person because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.

This form of the argument is as follows:

A makes claim P.
Bs also make claim P.
Therefore, A is a B.

Example:

"You say the gap between the rich and poor is unacceptable, but communists also say this, therefore you are a communist"

This fallacy can also take another form:

A makes claim P.
Bs make claims P and Q
Therefore, A makes claim Q.

Examples:

"You say the gap between the rich and poor is unacceptable, but communists also say this, and they believe in revolution. Thus, you believe in revolution."

Honor by association

The logical inverse of "guilt by association" is honor by association, where one claims that someone or something must be reputable because of the people or organizations that are related to it or otherwise support it. For example:

Examples

  • Alice is a lawyer, and Alice thinks highly of Bob. Therefore, Bob must know the law.
  • Aaron will make a good race car driver, because his friend is a good race car driver.
  • Mother Theresa was good and a Catholic, so all Catholics are good.

See also

References

Vorlage:Unreferenced

Vorlage:Philo-stub

Vorlage:Relevance fallacies