One Philosophy Question

Part –IV: Fallacies of Vagueness

and Ambiguity

TPHIL 250 Winter 2019

Week 7 February 21

Meaning, vagueness, ambiguity

1. Is anything is alive (that is made of biochemical processes, i.e. consumes food, derives energy from it, grows, and adapts itself to its surroundings and reproduces) and is innocent, then that thing has a right to life.

2. Data is not made of biochemical processes, he does not grow or reproduce, even though he is innocent.

3. So, Data does not have right to life (?). But Data is unique. Why?

1. Anything that is intelligent, self-aware, and autonomous has a right to life

2. Data is intelligent, self-aware, and autonomous

3. Therefore, Data has rights.

Grice’s conversational rules and its significance • “People do not always follow these conversational rules. They

withhold information, they elaborate needlessly, they assert what they know to be false, they say the first thing that pops into their heads, they wander off the subject, and they talk vaguely and obscurely.” p. 34

Fallacy

• Any error of weakness that detracts from the soundness of an argument yet somehow manages to disguise itself so as to give the argument the appearance of being better than it really is.

• Fallacies violate the criteria of good argument.

• It is important to remember that -

a) you are arguing and not giving your opinion and therefore,

b) arguing rationally based on sound principles that are relevant to the truth of your conclusion,

c) acceptable with sound reasons, and

d) offers effective rebuttals to all challenges to your position.

• “All transactions effected pursuant to this instrument shall be effected for the account and risk and in the name of the undersigned; and the undersigned hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless from, and to pay promptly on demand, any and all losses arising therefrom or any debit balance due thereon.”

• “They say that the money had promised three years ago to be new money this year is not new money. We have not paid it yet and it is old money versus new money. For me new money is new money if paying $5 or $10, its the same money.” Jean Chrétien, Canadian PM

Fallacies of Language

• Unclear language → sign of unclear thought

• Intentionally unclear, goal is to confuse → obfuscation (making it too confusing or unclear to be understandable, and hence to misdirect it from an argument’s faults).

• A vague sentence is one that lacks a precise meaning. Thus, a phrase or concept is vague when there is an unsettled range of application for a the phrase or concept

• Everything is vague to a degree you do not realize until you have tried to make it precise. – Bertrand Russell.

Context and Vagueness

• However, there is no such thing as “absolute clarity”. Clarity and rigor “depends on the context in which it occurs.”

• A term which works well in one context/area becomes vague when applied in another. Vagueness, in many contexts, is resolved by definition.

• Vague sentences may be necessary in some contexts • Sometimes vagueness helps (a pinch of salt)

Sentences that express a vague thought/feeling but is not wrong expressing it (when precision is not necessary)

• I don’t care much for Beethoven’s early string quartets

• That was a noisy party they had last night, and it went on until all hours.

• Daphne du Maurier’s novels have a disquieting effect upon the reader.

Health risks of playing football and aspirin

• “I believe this: that the game has always been a risk, you know, and the way certain people are. Look at it. You take an aspirin, I take an aspirin, it might give you extreme side effects of illness and your body…may reject it, where I would be fine. So there is so much we don’t know.”

– Jim Irsay, Indianapolis Colts owner, USA Today, 2016

Vagueness: What is a borderline case?

Vagueness

• “An expression in a given context is used vaguely if it leaves open too wide a range of borderline cases for the successful and legitimate use of that expression in that context.” p. 276

• Examples of terms that are or could be vague • Rich, Poor, Healthy, Tall, Wise, Obscene etc.

• Example: Applicants must hold a diploma in early childhood education or have equivalent work experience.

Find the vague words/phrases

• Committee Chair: “Most officials are monitoring this situation very closely, and I can promise that we shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the situation is resolved in a way that is fair to all the parties involved.”

• Essays for this course should be long enough to deal adequately with the assigned topic.

• You should sign our petition to protest against the violation of our rights by the government.

Vague words/phrases

• Committee Chair: “Most officials are monitoring this situation very closely, and I can promise that we shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the situation is resolved in a way that is fair to all the parties involved.”

• Essays for this course should be long enough to deal adequately with the assigned topic.

• You should sign our petition to protest against the violation of our rights by the government.

• Vagueness can lead to paradox

• B1= T, B1+1 = B2 = T

• B10000= F

• If one patch looks blue the next one does as well.

• B1, B1B2, B2, B2 B3, …….B9998  B9999, B9999  B10000,  B10000 (?)

Sorites Paradox 1. 10,000 grains of sand is a heap of sand

2. If10,000 grains of sand is a heap of sand, then 9999 grains of sand is a heap of sand.

3. 9999 grains of sand is a heap of sand.

4. If 9999 grains of sand is a heap of sand, then 9998 grains of sand is a heap of sand.

5. …..

C. 1 grain of sand is a heap of sand.

• Sorites Premise: For any number n, if n grain of sands is a heap, then n – 1 grains of sand is a heap.

• Comes in pairs, “heap” and “non heap” as the reverse argument that proceeds by subtracting is also of the same form.

1. A man with 1 hair on his head is bald

2. If a man with 1 hair on his head is bald, then a man with 2 hairs on his head is bald.

3. A man with 2 hairs on his head is bald.

4. If a man with 2 hairs on his head is bald, then a man with 3 hairs on his head is bald.

5. …..

C. A man with 100,000 hairs on his head is bald

Sorites premise: For any number n, if someone with n hairs on his head is bald, then someone with n+1 hairs on their head is bald.

Premises true, argument valid, but conclusion is false.

Possible responses to the paradox

• Conclusions of arguments from the heap seems false and therefore the argument is unsound.

• The Argument from Heap is therefore a fallacy.

Slippery Slope fallacy

Claims that the most extreme and indefensible form of action is not significantly different from the simplest and most defensible form (e.g. being bald and not being bald).

Kinds of Slippery Slopes

1. Conceptual Slippery Slope Arguments (CSS) - Results from vagueness of a category

- Argues that things at opposite ends of a continuum do not differ in a way that would be significant to justify drawing a distinction in one’s concepts or theories. p. 280

- CSS arguments depend on these principles - We should not draw a distinction between things that are not significantly different.

(generally true)

- If A is not significantly different from B, and B is not significantly different from C, then A is not significantly different from C. (false)

Example

1. Someone with only one cent is not rich.

2. A difference of one cent is not a significant difference (each of a series of difference is not significant)

3. Someone with 1,000,000,000,000,000 cents is rich.

C. There is no significant difference between being not rich (poor) and being rich.

• Are the premises false? • No

• Do the premises support the conclusion? • No. Just because owning a cent does not make one rich, and 1 zillion cents is made up of so

many insignificant individual cents, it does not follow that a one zillion cents is not significant.

Exercise III (p. 282) 1a (Argument from Heap) 1. A single grain of sand is not a heap.

2. Adding one grain of sand cannot make a heap out of what is not a heap.

 (3) No number of grains of sand makes a heap.

 (4) There are no heaps

1.b (Conceptual slippery slope).

1. There is no significant difference between a collection of grains of sand and another collection with just one more grain of sand.

2. If one collection of grains is not significantly different from a second collection of grains, and the second collection is not significantly different from a third collection, then the first collection is not significantly different from the third collection.

 There is no significant difference between a heap and a single grain of sand.

Exercise III – 2a: Fallacy of the heap

1. Someone who is four feet is not tall.

2. If four feet is not tall then adding one inch to four feet does not make that person tall

3.  Someone who is four feet and one inch tall is not tall

4. If four feet and once inch is not tall then adding one inch to four feet and two inches does not make that person tall

5.  Someone who is four feet and two inches tall is not tall (and so on)

_____________________________________________________

No number of inches added to four feet makes someone tall.

______________________________________________________

 Nobody is tall.

2a. Fallacy of the Heap (easier version)

1. Someone who is four feet is not tall.

2. Adding one inch to four feet does not make someone tall.

3. No number of inches added to four feet makes someone tall.

4. Nobody is tall.

2B – Conceptual Slippery Slope

1. There is no significant difference between being four feet tall and four feet and one inch tall.

2. If being four feet tall is not significantly different from being four feet and one inch tall, and being four feet and one inch tall is not significantly different from four feet and two inch tall, then the first is not significantly different from the third.

_________________________________________________________

3.  There is no significant difference between being tall and being short.

Prolife arguments against abortion

• A newborn baby is obviously a person whom it would be wrong to kill. Since there is little difference between a newborn baby and a baby just prior to birth, the latter is also a person whom it would be wrong to kill. And there is little difference between the fetus at 8.5 months and a few days before that. So, the fetus at any of these stages is also a person. But in the same way, there is almost no difference between the fetus at 8 months and just before that…and before that… We must face the fact that there is no stopping place. So the newly fertilized ovum is a person whom it would be wrong to kill. Abortion is therefore, murder.

Prochoice arguments for abortion

• Not many people really think that a newly fertilized ovum is a person that it would be wrong to kill. It is nothing but a microscopic bit of protoplasm, and we can dispose of it without qualms. But there is hardly any difference between the just fertilized ovum and the ovum the next day. And no much of a difference to the next day, nor to when the ovum is a week old. Similarly, progression to the following day or week doesn’t make much difference in itself. We must face the fact that there is no stopping place. If the just fertilized ovum is not a person, there is no person prior to birth. It is very hard to see why there should be any objection to abortion at any stage. Or, for that matter, why killing a newborn would be wrong if there were good reason to do so. Abortion is therefore, not murder.

California v Carney

Why is it fair to allow warrantless searches of mobile vans and not other similar cases?

Fourth Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

http://www.stus.com/stus-cartoon.php?name=California+v.++Carney&cartoon=cpr0060

2. Fairness Slippery Slope (FSS)

• “Its unfair to draw a line” argument

• FSS arguments exploit the vagueness of the relevant concepts and the association between their application and judgments of fairness.

• E.g. Death penalty – is it fair to draw a line between crimes punishable by death and those not punishable by death?

• Abortion: Since no moment in the continuum of the development between a fertilized egg and a human baby is especially significant, it is not fair to grant a right to life to a baby unless one grants the same rights to every fertilized egg.

Exercise IV

• People are found not guilty by reason of insanity when they cannot avoid breaking the law. But people who are brought up in certain deprived social circumstances are not much more able than the insane to avoid breaking the law. So it would be unjust to find them guilty.

• The above argument is FSS as it concludes that it is unfair or “unjust” to treat one group of people differently from another, when there appears to be no significant reason as to why.

Kyl’s argument

Why clerk hiring allowance should not be increased: (Chapter 4)

The amount of increase does not appear large. I trust, however there is no one among us who would suggest that the addition of a clerk would not entail allowances for another desk, another typewriter, more materials, and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the next step would then be a request for additional office space, and ultimately new buildings.

Causal Slippery Slope

• Also known as Domino arguments

• Claims that “once a certain kind of event occurs, other similar events will also occur, and this will lead eventually to disaster.” p. 285

• E.g. Justification for US intervention in Vietnam in 1960s.

• Questions to ask to formulate the correct response to Causal Slippery Slope argument. Positive (yes) responses to all these would make the slippery slope argument strong.

- Are any of the claimed effects really very bad? - Are any of these effects really very likely? - Do these dangers outweigh all the benefits of what is being criticized?

A B C D

• If assault weapons are banned, Congress will ban handguns next, and then rifles. Eventually, hunters will not be able to hunt, and law- abiding citizens will have no way to defend themselves against criminals. (Exercise VI, p.288)

Identify the fallacy

• The less death penalties they do, the more life sentences will occur, and more life sentences means building more jails, and more jails means more land, and more land means way more workers not only to build the jail but also hire more officers to work there. So, all in all killing them is more cheaper.

Need for precision in meaning

• Vague: lacks a precise meaning, and thus allows continuous range of interpretations

• Ambiguous sentence: two or more meanings, thus allows various discrete interpretations

“The Cardinals are in town” - possible candidates

Definitions of Ambiguity

1. Ambiguity in sentence occurs “only if …[the term or expression used] is misleading or potentially misleading because it is hard to tell which of a number of possible meaning is intended in that context.” p. 291

2. An expression is ambiguous if it admits more than one interpretation. p. 292

• So, not every expression is ambiguous. When presence of two or more meanings cause confusion and is misleading or is potentially misleading, we criticize the expression that causes the problem as “ambiguous.”

Semantic ambiguity

• Semantic ambiguity arise from a) a particular word or phrase that has multiple meanings and b) lacking a sufficient context to determine which is intended.

• Jessica is cold

• Aunt Della never used glasses

• Frederick Ryan [Washington Post publisher]: But there’s standards like malice is required. Would you weaken that? Would you require less than malice for news organizations?

• Donald Trump: I would make it so that when someone writes incorrectly, yeah, I think I would get a little bit away from malice without having to get too totally away. Look, I think many of the stories about me are written badly. I don’t know if it’s malice because the people don’t know me.

• Stephen Stromburg, Editorial Writer: How are you defining “incorrect”? It seems like you’re defining it as fairness or your view of fairness rather than accuracy.

• Trump: Fairness, fairness is, you know, part of the world. But you know, I’ve had stories that are written that are absolutely incorrect.

- Meeting with Washington Post’s editorial board, March 2016

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/21/a-transcript-of-donald-trumps-meeting- with-the-washington-post-editorial-board/?utm_term=.e0adae6e64d8

Syntactic (Grammatical) Ambiguity or Amphiboly

Occurs when grammatical structure (syntax) of a sentence allows two interpretations, each of which gives rise to a different meaning.

• Examples:

• Mary had a little lamb.

• Mary had a little portion of meat derived from a lamb to eat.

• Daphne decided to quit smoking while driving to Denver.

• Jim and I have suffered tremendously; often I wake up in the morning and wish I were dead, and I know Jim does too.

• You must show a birth certificate and a driver’s license or a passport in order to apply to the program.

“I don’t believe we should be punishing millions of people with outrageous levels of student debt. That shortsighted path must end.” – Sanders, 2016

Disambiguating Exercise I (p. 294)

1. Barry Bonds (the baseball player) was safe at home.

• Rewriting - Barry Bonds was safe in his house

- Barry Bonds was safe at home plate

• Expanding • Barry Bonds was safe at home when I telephoned him.

• Barry Bonds was safe at home, tying the score.

Contd.

7. The meaning of the term “altering” is changing.

• Rewriting • The words “altering” and “changing” have the same meaning.

• The word “altering” is changing its meaning.

• Expanding • The meaning of the term “altering” is changing – they are almost perfect

synonyms

• The meaning of the term “altering” is changing, which is just another example of meaning shift.

Exercise II

1. Milk Drinkers Turn to Powder - Milk drinkers switch to milk powder

- Milk drinkers turn into powder

2. Anti-busing Rider Killed by Senate - An anti-busing amendment is rejected by senate

- An anti-busing protester is murdered by senate

3. Mrs Gandhi Stoned in Rally in India - Mrs Gandhi is attacked with stones in rally in India

- Mrs. Gandhi got high on drugs in rally in India.

• We shouldn’t hire Peter, because our company has a policy against hiring drug users, and I saw Peter take aspirin, which is a drug. p. 297

Equivocation

• Using a term or expression in an argument in one sense in one place and another sense in another (one meaning is acceptable in one part of the argument and another is acceptable in another part)

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/02/22/smokers-get-from-philip-morris-usa-suit-over-marlboro-lights/fE7IoEy4HiGCfetUPPyQLP/story.html

“The Food and Drug Administration banned the use of the label “Light” in 2010. Plaintiffs in a Massachusetts case said they were duped into thinking such cigarettes were safer.”

How to find fallacy of equivocation (p. 297)

1. Distinguish the possible meanings of the potentially ambiguous expressions in the argument

2. For each meaning, restate the argument so that each expression clearly has the same meaning in all of the premises and conclusion

3. Evaluate the resulting arguments separately

If the argument fails when each term is used consistently throughout the argument, then it is guilty of equivocation.

Fallacy of Equivocation: When a term is used with more than one meaning • Every voluntary act performed by a human being originates from that

person’s own conception of what is good. Since selfishness consists in acting to further one’s own good, every voluntary action is selfish.

- Equivocates the term “good.”

- Premise 1 may include unselfish ideal such as wellbeing of others

- Premise 2 “good” means only that which is in one’s own self interest

- Premise 1 and 2: conception of “good” are not equivalent

Every voluntary act performed by a human being originates from that person’s own conception of the good which includes an unselfish ideal such as the wellbeing of others. Since, selfishness consists in acting to further one’s self interest, every voluntary action is selfish.

• Homosexuality [is wrong because it] is not normal. (Bush, 1992 presidential campaign).

P1 Homosexuality is not normal

P2 Whatever is not normal is wrong

 Homosexuality is wrong

P 1 Homosexuality is not normal because it is unnatural (not found in nature)

P 2 Whatever is unnatural (not found in nature) is wrong

(3) Homosexuality is wrong (from 1-2)

P1 Homosexuality is not normal because it is against social norms

P2 Whatever is against social norms is wrong

 Homosexuality is wrong (from 1-2)