Fallacy of ambiguity, kinds of ambiguity, emotively neutral language, kinds of agreement & disagreement,

1. Follow atGoogle + | amirhassan741@gmail.com
https://www.slideshare.net/amirhassan27
1 Written By: AMIR HASSAN OF CHEMISTRY DEPTT POST GRADUATE COLLAGE MARDAN
FALLACY OF AMBIGUITY
Definition: A kind of fallacy in which the meaning of a word or, phrase shifts within
the course of an argument they are called fallacy of ambiguity.
KINDS OF FALLACY OF AMBIGUITY
They includes the following kinds:
1. EQUIVOCATION.
2. AMPHIBOLY.
3. ACCENT.
4. COMPOSITION.
5. DIVISION.
1. EQUIVOCATION.
Equivocation is kind of fallacy of ambiguity that occur when the
meaning of an ambiguous term is covertly switched during the reasoning.
 Most of the word have more than one literal meaning & is often used but when we
confuse several meaning of a word or, phrase accidently we are using the word
equivocally. If we do in the context of an argument we called the fallacy of
equivocation.
 In general we have: X is Y. (meaning 1), Y is Z (meaning 2), and Therefore X is Z.
 For Example: 1) A feather is light.
2) What is light cannot be dark.
3) Therefore, a feather cannot be dark.
In premise the word “light’ is used to mean not heavy and middle term “light” is
Used I optical sense. The two word are unrelated & the conclusion are formed
Even word is same.
2. AMPHIBOLY.
Amphiboly is a Greek Word = Two in a lump or, the doublings of lump
A statement is amphibious when its meaning is indeterminate because of loose way in which
its words are combines.
 Fallacy of amphiboly occurs when syntactic ambiguity allows one meaning to be used
in the premise and another in the conclusion.
 The fallacy is similar to the equivocation but exploits an ambiguous grammatical
construct rather than ambiguous word.
 Amphiboly can be used to create jokes.
 For Example: -“I shot an elephant in my pajamas’”.
 These are consequential when it appear in policy document, legal documents,
construct or, constitution.
3. ACCENT.
When of an argument relies on the meaning of the same word emphasized
differently the fallacy of accent has be committed.
 They refer to as accentus, misleading accent in a type of ambiguity that arises when
the meaning of sentence is changed by placing a usual verbal emphasize or, when in a
written passage it’s left unclear on which word the emphasis was supposed.

2. Follow atGoogle + | amirhassan741@gmail.com
https://www.slideshare.net/amirhassan27
2 Written By: AMIR HASSAN OF CHEMISTRY DEPTT POST GRADUATE COLLAGE MARDAN
 When a premise relies for its apparent meaning on one possible emphasis but a
conclusion is drawn that relies on the meaning of the same word accented differently
the fallacy of accent is committed.
 For Example:
1) I did not take the test yesterday.(somebody did else)
2) I did not take the test yesterday. (I did not take it)
3) I did not take the test yesterday. (I did something else with it)
4) I did not take the test yesterday. (I took a different one)
5) I did not take the test yesterday. (I took something else)
6) I did not take the test yesterday. (I took it some other day)
4. COMPOSITION.
The term fallacy is applied to both of two closely related type’s mistaken
argument.
 The fallacy of composition arises when a conclusion is drawn about a whole
based on feature of its constituent element when in no fact justification is
provided for inference.
 There are two type of fallacy of composition:
 The first types is arises when a person reason from the characteristic of individual
members of class or group to conclusion regarding the characteristic of entire class
or, group as whole.
For Example: formally reasoning
1) Individual F thing have characteristic A, B, C, D etc.
 2) Therefore, the whole class of F things has characteristic A, B, C, D etc.
 Second type is committed when it’s concluded that what is true of the pat of a whole
must be true without therebieng justification for claim.
 For Example:
1) all of the property of object O has the property P.
2) therefore O has the property P.
Where the property ‘P’ is one which does not distribute from to a whole.
1) The human body cell made up of cell, cell is invisible therefore human
body is invisible.
2) Both chlorine & sodium is harmful to human therefore any combination of
sodium & chlorine for e.g. Table salt will be dangerous to human.
5. DIVISION.
A fallacy of division occur when one reason logically that something true for the
whole must also be true of all or, some of its parts.
Or,
A fallacy of division occur when argues from the attribute of a collection of element to the
attributes of element themselves.

3. Follow atGoogle + | amirhassan741@gmail.com
https://www.slideshare.net/amirhassan27
3 Written By: AMIR HASSAN OF CHEMISTRY DEPTT POST GRADUATE COLLAGE MARDAN
 For Example:
1) The 2nd grade class Jefferson elementary eats a lot of ice-cream s.
2) Carlos is a 2nd grader in Jefferson elementary.
3) Therefore, carols eats a lot if ice-creams.
Existential import
A has existential import when its truth depends on evidence for the existence of things is
certain category in the case of categorical proposition the existence of thing in categories
signified by its subject and predicate term
i. Many modern logician hold that existential import is a function statement logical from.
ii. According to this view universal categorical statement is general do not have existential
import.
iii. Statements that are particular in nature however, do have existential import like this:
1) Some S is P.
2) Some S are not P.
IF imply the existence of S if S not exist both statement are false.
Kinds Of Agreement & Disagreement
When we seek to resolve dispute that have both factual and emotional aspect.
 It’s important to determine what really issue between the disputing parties is.
 If disagreement truly is one about whether the death penalty deters in fact, then
resolution of dispute will require.
 First of all an effort to determine those facts objectively although may not be easy to do.
 If disagreement arises from conflicting convictions about the rightness of state-
authorized executions, whether or, not the death penalty deter, coming to agreement about
the fact is likely to prove insufficient to resolve the dispute.
The dispute fall into three categories:
 Obviously genuine dispute.
 Merely verbal dispute.
 Apparently verbal but really genuine.
 Obviously genuine dispute. In first category there is no doubt in argument about the-
deter and may agree.
 Merely verbal dispute. The second category of dispute is which the apparent conflict
is not genuine and can be resolved by coming to agreement about how some word or
phrase is to be understood.
For Example: F may hold a tree falling in the wilderness with no person to hear its
sound; G insists that a sound will produce by falling tree. Here “sound” word is a
verbal.
 Apparently verbal but really genuine. A third category is more slippery. A
misunderstanding about the term of use may be involved in such cases, but when
misunderstanding is clear up a disagreement goes beyond the meaning of words.
 In many cases disagreement is attitude about some event or possible outcomes
is rooted in disagreement in some beliefs about fact, in other cases it’s not.
 One of the greatest of all football coaches and one of the greatest of all writers on

4. Follow atGoogle + | amirhassan741@gmail.com
https://www.slideshare.net/amirhassan27
4 Written By: AMIR HASSAN OF CHEMISTRY DEPTT POST GRADUATE COLLAGE MARDAN
sports differed profoundly about the importance of winning.
Emotively neutral language
The word we used to convey beliefs may be neutral and exact, but they may also have an
impact on that attitude of our listener.
 A rose by any other name would smell as sweet but our response to a flower is likely to
be influenced if we are told as it is handed to us that is commonly called skunkweed.
 Emotionally colored language is appropriate in some context poetry,
 For example: but is highly inappropriate in other context in survey research.
 If we aim to provide an unbiased report of fact we undermine that objective if we used
word that is heavily charged with emotional meaning.
 Sometime however it is nearly impossible to avoid some emotive content such as when
those in conflict about the morality of abortion call themselves either pro-life or, pro-
choice.
 In logic we generally strive for language that is so for as possible free of the distortion
that emotive meaning introduce.
"With words", said Benjamin Disraeli, "we govern men".
Kinds of Agreement and Disagreement (Part 2)
In fact, an excessive reliance on emotively charged language can create the appearance of
disagreement between parties who do not differ on the facts at all, and it can just as easily
disguise substantive disputes under a veneer of emotive agreement. Since the degrees of
agreement in belief and attitude are independent of each other, there are four possible
combinations at work here:
1. Agreement in belief and agreement in attitude: There aren't any problems in this
instance, since both parties hold the same positions and have the same feelings about
them.
2. Agreement in belief but disagreement in attitude: This case, if unnoticed, may become
the cause of endless (but pointless) shouting between people whose feelings differ
sharply about some fact upon which they are in total agreement.
3. Disagreement in belief but agreement in attitude: In this situation, parties may never
recognize, much less resolve, their fundamental difference of opinion, since they are
lulled by their shared feelings into supposing themselves allied.
4. Disagreement in belief and disagreement in attitude: Here the parties have so little in
common that communication between them often breaks down entirely.
It is often valuable, then, to recognize the levels of agreement or disagreement at work in any exchange of
views. That won't always resolve the dispute between two parties, of course, but it will ensure that they
don't waste their time on an inappropriate method of argument or persuasion.

5. Follow atGoogle + | amirhassan741@gmail.com
https://www.slideshare.net/amirhassan27
5 Written By: AMIR HASSAN OF CHEMISTRY DEPTT POST GRADUATE COLLAGE MARDAN