For
some reason, it has become commonplace to misuse "begs the
question." A very recent example, in addition to a commercial I cringed
over in my car, was found in an online article about how to help loved ones who
have been diagnosed with HIV: "There are more
than 1.2 million people in the U.S. living with HIV, and 1 in 8 doesn’t know
it. Though rates have steadily declined in the last decade, there were around
40,000 people newly diagnosed in 2015. Which begs the
question: When a loved one tests positive for HIV and
decides to tell you about it, what’s next?"
No question has been begged, as if the reader is
sitting down, crying out inside, "please ask what we can do next!"
Nor has any answer been begged. But the data does raise a question about what,
if anything, can or should be done.
To beg
the question is a logical fallacy where the proponent of an argument assumes as
true the thing to be proved. Here is an example: "The Executive branch of
government is charged with executing the laws and cannot do so unless the
President has unrestricted power to issue Executive Orders." If this were
the complete argument, it would beg the question. The conclusion is that the
Executive must have unrestricted power to issue Executive orders. The premise
is that the executive is charged with executing the laws. In order for the
conclusion to follow from the premise, one must assume that unrestricted power
to issue executive orders is necessary to execute the laws in accordance with
Article II of the United States Constitution. This is a dangerous assumption.
Being able to
identify assumptions like these in an argument can prove a powerful tool for rebuttal
or refutation. Many questions may be raised in the process, but never feel that
you must beg for an answer to a question you did not raise.
No comments:
Post a Comment