English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

For example:

"To corrupt society by allowing violent video games is something only a mother could understand."

The point of contention is likely to be the latter part, where you'd be tempted to say "That's nonsense, being a mother doesn't somehow give you greater powers of perception" or similar, and argue about that, whilst completely missing the point that the person arguing has just stated that violent video games corrupt society and it has gone through unnoticed.

They could easily follow up with "Go on then, name one man that is able to understand the corruption they cause", and you're now fighting on two fronts - if you say "hold on, that premise is flawed" you can be steamrolled over because it sort of seems like it should be true, and you immediately weaken your position as appearing not to understand thus proving the second point about mothers.

Alternatively, you could defend yourself and argue their case for them "Well as a man I was exposed to many video games as a child and they haven't had any effect on myself or anyone that I know", and you're knee deep in agreeing with their hidden assumption before you know it.

share|improve this question

closed as off-topic by FumbleFingers, TrevorD, Kristina Lopez, p.s.w.g, choster Jul 26 '13 at 5:58

  • This question does not appear to be about English language and usage within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

This question probably belongs on philosophy.stackexchange.com - also, you might be interested in nizkor.org/features/fallacies . – Mark Bannister Jul 23 '13 at 13:59
This question appears to be off-topic because it is about rhetoric/pragmatics, not English language as such. – FumbleFingers Jul 23 '13 at 20:40
This is a legitimate word request. I found the same term @bib did (false premises) after considerable effort. – MετάEd Jul 26 '13 at 14:42
up vote 2 down vote accepted

You are describing, at least in part, an argument based on false premises. However you are also adding an element of misdirection.

But your question is fatally flawed. Your British public school habit of engaging in distraction when crafting a "logical" position is arguably the principal reason that the budget shortfall will continue to shape the debate to end the logjam on the withdrawal of Royal troops from the American colonies.


share|improve this answer
Can't argue with that! (Literally, I have no idea what you just said) – SLC Jul 23 '13 at 14:45
@SLC Then my plan worked! – bib Jul 23 '13 at 18:57
Also, this is not a point of logic, nor of grammar, but of rhetoric, as the Greeks and medieval scholars would call it. Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric (all in Latin, naturally) were the first and most important three -- the Trivium) -- of the Seven Liberal Arts. Today they're called, respectively, Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics, and together with Phonetics they constitute the core disciplines of linguistics. Though now it's all languages. – John Lawler Jul 23 '13 at 19:54
Thanks, that's very interesting! – SLC Jul 24 '13 at 8:25

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.