Πλάνη των πολλών ερωτημάτων: Διαφορά μεταξύ των αναθεωρήσεων
Περιεχόμενο που διαγράφηκε Περιεχόμενο που προστέθηκε
μΧωρίς σύνοψη επεξεργασίας |
Χωρίς σύνοψη επεξεργασίας |
||
Γραμμή 1:
'''Η πλάνη των πολλών ερωτημάτων''', ή αλλιώς '''πλάνη της προκατάληψης''', ή '''plurium interrogationum''' ([[Λατ.]], «πολλών ερωτημάτων»), αποτελεί [[λογική πλάνη]], η οποία συντελείται όταν κάποιος κάνει μία ερώτηση η οποία λαμβάνει ως δεδομένο κάτι το οποίο ούτε έχει αποδειχθεί, ούτε έχει γίνει αποδεκτό από τους συζητητές - όταν, για παράδειγμα, περιλαμβάνει μία πρόταση η οποία είναι τουλάχιστον τόσο αμφισβητίσιμη όσο και το προτεινόμενο συμπέρασμα. Για παράδειγμα, με το να καταθέσει κανείς ότι είναι επικίνδυνο να περπατά κάποιος μόνος την νύχτα στο δάσος, επειδή μπορεί να τον βασκάνουν νεράιδες, λαμβάνει αυτομάτως ως δεδομένο ότι υπάρχουν νεράιδες. Αυτό, όμως, είναι μία αμφισβητίσιμη πρόταση.
This fallacy is often used rhetorically so that the question limits direct replies to something that serves the questioner's agenda. The standard example of this is the question ''Are you still beating your wife?'' Whether the person asked answers yes or no, he will admit to having beaten his wife at some time in the past. Thus, that fact is ''presupposed'' by the question, and if it has not been agreed upon by the speakers before, the question is improper, and the fallacy of many questions has been committed. (The Japanese word ''[[Mu (Japanese word)|Mu]]'', which in the context of [[Zen|Zen Buddhism]] loosely translates as "the question has an inappropriate presumption", is a potential alternative answer.)
Γραμμή 7:
A similar fallacy is [[begging the question]].
==Υπαινικτική μορφή==
One form of misleading discourse is where something is implied without being said explicitly, by phrasing it as a question. For example, the question "Does Mr. Jones kick puppies for fun ?" does not claim that he does, but implies that there must be at least some indication that he does, or the question would not need to be asked. The person asking the question is thus protected from accusations of making false claims, but still manages to make the implication. The fallacy isn't in the question itself, but rather in the listener's assumption that the question would not have been asked without some evidence to support the supposition.
Γραμμή 13:
In order to have the desired effect, the question must be sufficiently outrageous that it would not normally be asked in polite conversation. For example, the question "Does Mr. Jones own a dog?" would not cause the listener to think there must be some evidence that he does, since this form of general question is frequently asked with no foreknowledge of the answer.
===Παραδείγματα===
*During a [[2005]] mayoral race debate in [[Detroit]], [[Michigan]], [[USA]], the following statement was made:
Γραμμή 25:
Note that in neither case was an accusation actually made. However, in both cases the clear implication was that Hendrix/Stevenson did have "something to hide".
==Εξωτερικοί σύνδεσμοι==
* [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Report_on_Senator_Joseph_R._McCarthy "A Report on Joseph R. McCarthy"] [[Edward R. Murrow]] ''See it Now'' (CBS-TV, March 9, 1954)
Γραμμή 31:
* [http://www.adamsmith.org/logicalfallacies Adam Smith Institute: Logical Fallacies]
==
[[Category:Λογικές πλάνες]]
[[fr:Plurium interrogationum]]
| |||