2 7 6cHaP Te r 1 3 ■ F a l l a c i e s o f V a g u e n e s sVagueness
Perhaps the most common form of unclarity is vagueness. It arises when a
concept applies along a continuum or a series of very small changes. The
standard example is baldness. A person with a full head of hair is not bald.
A person without a hair on his head is bald. In between, however, is a range
of cases in which we cannot say definitely whether the person is bald or not.
These are called borderline cases. Here we say something less definite, such as
that this person is “going bald.”
Our inability to apply the concept of baldness in a borderline case is not
due to ignorance of the number of hairs on the person’s head. It will not help
to count the number of hairs there. Even if we knew the exact number, we
would still not be able to say whether the person was bald or not. The same
is true of most adjectives that concern properties admitting of degrees—for
example, “rich,” “healthy,” “tall,” “wise,” and “ruthless.”
For the most part, imprecision—the lack of sharply defined limits—causes
little difficulty. In fact, this is a useful feature of our language, for suppose
we did have to count the number of grains of salt between our fingers to de-
termine whether or not we hold a pinch of salt. It would take a long time to
follow a simple recipe that calls for a pinch of salt.
Yet, difficulties can arise when borderline cases themselves are at issue.
Suppose that a state passes a law forbidding all actions in public that are
obscene. There will be many cases that clearly fall under this law and many
cases that clearly do not fall under it. There will also be many cases in which
it will not be clear whether or not they fall under this law. Laws are some-
times declared unconstitutional for this very reason. Here we shall say that
the law is vague. In calling the law vague, we are criticizing it. We are not
simply noticing the existence of borderline cases, for there will usually be
borderline cases no matter how careful we are. Instead, we are saying that
there are too many borderline cases for this context. More precisely, we shall
say that 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.
Vagueness thus depends on context. To further illustrate this context
dependence, consider the expression “light football player.” There are, of
course, borderline cases between those football players who are light and
those who are not light. But on these grounds alone, we would not say that
the expression is vague. It is usually a perfectly serviceable expression, and
we can indicate borderline cases by saying such things as “Jones is a bit light
for a football player.” Suppose, however, that Ohio State and Cal Tech wish
to have a game between their light football players. It is obvious that the
previous understanding of what counts as being light is too vague for this
new context. At Ohio State, anyone under 210 pounds is considered light.
At Cal Tech, anyone over 150 pounds is considered heavy. What is needed,
then, is a ruling, such as that anyone under 175 pounds will be considered97364_ch13_ptg01_273-290.indd 276 15/11/13 11:01 AM
some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materiallyCopyright 201^3 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,
affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.