great thinkers, great ideas

38 An Introduction to Clearer Thinking

trust anyone over thirty.” Or a more mundane comment often

heard about remedies: “Whenever I have a headache, I take

___________(fill in the blank); take two of them and your

headache will disappear.”

Because of our lack of understanding of this fallacy, we

continually recommend remedies, doctors, lawyers, stock bro­

kers, only because our limited experience has been successful.

Also, and perhaps worse, we seek to abolish all manner of things,

not because of their intrinsic evil but because of abuses we know

or hear about. Thus, prohibition of liquor was enacted because

of drunkenness, and recently some have called for the abolition

of Halloween trick-or- treating because of doctored candy and

fruit being offered to children.

BEGGING THE QUESTION Also called the circular

argument, this fallacy arises when one tries to use his initial

premise as proof of the conclusion reached. It is circular in that

the argument continually refers back to the initial contention,

which has not been proven, but is offered as proof. Consider the

following dialogues:

“Why do you drink?”

“I drink to forget my problem.”

“What is your problem?”

“I drink.”

Or probably more familiar to many young people:

“It’s time to go to bed - go.”

“Why do I have to go to bed?”

“Because I said to.”

“Why are you saying it?”

“Because it’s time to go to bed.”

FALSE CAUSE This fallacy assumes a cause and effect

relationship when in fact there is none. We commit this fallacy
when we assume that because something follows, it follows due
to some causal relationship. This fallacy is often called post hoc,^
ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this). When we
see things in some juxtaposition, we conclude a necessary