Changes

107 bytes added ,  16:46, March 15, 2012
Undo revision 960079 by Bogart12 (talk): A presupposition of a communal right of ownership is still a presupposition of a right of ownership.
Line 1: Line 1:  
The fallacy of the '''stolen concept''', also known as the fallacy of the '''self-negating statement''', is the [[logical fallacy]] of implicitly affirming what one wants to disprove or, alternatively, implicitly denying what one wants to prove.  That is, the [[conclusion]] [[contradiction|contradicts]] one of the [[premise]]s.  The term "stolen concept" referst to a concept that is "stolen" from the [[out of context|context]] that gives that concept meaning.
 
The fallacy of the '''stolen concept''', also known as the fallacy of the '''self-negating statement''', is the [[logical fallacy]] of implicitly affirming what one wants to disprove or, alternatively, implicitly denying what one wants to prove.  That is, the [[conclusion]] [[contradiction|contradicts]] one of the [[premise]]s.  The term "stolen concept" referst to a concept that is "stolen" from the [[out of context|context]] that gives that concept meaning.
 
==Examples==
 
==Examples==
 +
*[[Socialist]]s claim that property is theft, but the concept of theft presupposes a right to own property.
 
*[[postmodernism|Postmodernists]] claim to know objectively that objective knowledge is impossible.
 
*[[postmodernism|Postmodernists]] claim to know objectively that objective knowledge is impossible.
 
*[[Liberal Christianity|Liberal Christians]] claim that the [[Bible]], when [[Cafeteria Christianity|"rightly" divided]] and [[allegorical interpretation|"correctly" interpreted]], is the ultimate authority on [[faith]].  However, for that to work, the truly ultimate authority on faith would be the standard used for choosing which Bible verses to follow and for interpreting them, not the Bible itself.
 
*[[Liberal Christianity|Liberal Christians]] claim that the [[Bible]], when [[Cafeteria Christianity|"rightly" divided]] and [[allegorical interpretation|"correctly" interpreted]], is the ultimate authority on [[faith]].  However, for that to work, the truly ultimate authority on faith would be the standard used for choosing which Bible verses to follow and for interpreting them, not the Bible itself.
Line 10: Line 11:  
*Liberals argue that the debt ceiling should be raised whenever reached.  This argument makes the entire ceiling worthless in preventing excessive spending.
 
*Liberals argue that the debt ceiling should be raised whenever reached.  This argument makes the entire ceiling worthless in preventing excessive spending.
 
*[[Evolutionists]] use the [[argument from poor design]] to attempt to disprove [[creationism]]; however, according to evolutionism, natural selection should have selected out all suboptimal designs.
 
*[[Evolutionists]] use the [[argument from poor design]] to attempt to disprove [[creationism]]; however, according to evolutionism, natural selection should have selected out all suboptimal designs.
−
   
==See also==
 
==See also==
 
*[[Reductio Ad Absurdum]], a form of argument that can be used to expose a stolen concept
 
*[[Reductio Ad Absurdum]], a form of argument that can be used to expose a stolen concept
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
3,026

edits