Podcast
Questions and Answers
What is the best way to confront those who commit the fallacy of incompatible premises?
What is the best way to confront those who commit the fallacy of incompatible premises?
- Agreeing with their contradictory premises to avoid conflict
- Translating their contradictory premises with the symbols of A and not-A (correct)
- Bringing in unrelated premises to confuse the argument
- Ignoring their premises and focusing on the conclusion
Which of the following is a necessary condition of meaningful intellectual discourse?
Which of the following is a necessary condition of meaningful intellectual discourse?
- Drawing explicit conclusions from contradictory claims
- Using ambiguous language to confuse the audience
- Including irrelevant information in the argument
- The law of noncontradiction (not both A and not-A) (correct)
When an argument has contradictory premises, what is typically true about the conclusion that is drawn?
When an argument has contradictory premises, what is typically true about the conclusion that is drawn?
- The conclusion brings in new unrelated information
- There is no conclusion drawn at all (correct)
- The conclusion is often implicitly clear
- The conclusion is directly derived from the premises
What can be inferred if both A and not-A are claimed to be true in an argument?
What can be inferred if both A and not-A are claimed to be true in an argument?
How does resolving the implied conflict in premises impact the acceptability of conclusions drawn from an argument?
How does resolving the implied conflict in premises impact the acceptability of conclusions drawn from an argument?
What happens if an arguer uses contradictory claims but doesn't draw an explicit conclusion?
What happens if an arguer uses contradictory claims but doesn't draw an explicit conclusion?
Why is it crucial for those committing the fallacy of incompatible premises to be familiar with the law of noncontradiction?
Why is it crucial for those committing the fallacy of incompatible premises to be familiar with the law of noncontradiction?
What approach can be taken to confront an argument with incompatible premises?
What approach can be taken to confront an argument with incompatible premises?
How can using symbols like A and not-A help in resolving incompatible premises in an argument?
How can using symbols like A and not-A help in resolving incompatible premises in an argument?
What is an effective way to address an argument with incompatible premises if the arguer is not familiar with the law of noncontradiction?
What is an effective way to address an argument with incompatible premises if the arguer is not familiar with the law of noncontradiction?
