Fallacy of composition
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to navigationJump to search
The fallacy of composition is a logical fallacy that arises when the inference of an argument depends on the erroneous transference of an attribute of the parts of something to the whole.[1] This is the opposite of the fallacy of division.[2]
Examples
- "Richard likes sardines. He also likes toffee pudding. Therefore, it is quite sure that he would like a toffee pudding topped with sardines."
- The frequent accusation that design theorists reduce life to mechanism, commits a fallacy of composition, arguing incorrectly that what is true of the parts must be true of the whole since just the fact the cells have machine-like aspects does not imply that they are machines.[3]
Formal example
Formally speaking this fallacy has the following structure:
- p is part of w
- p has property t
- therefore, w has property t
| Use the {{fallacy|Fallacy of composition}} template to insert the above warning on a page containing an example of the Fallacy of composition fallacy. The template links the warning label to this page. |
References
- ↑ Hurley, Patrick J (2008). A Concise Introduction to Logic (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth. p. 159. ISBN 978-0-495-50383-5.
- ↑ Bennett, Bo (2012). Logically...Fallacious:The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies. Sudbury, MA: eBookIt.com. p. 112. ISBN 978-1-4566-0752-4.
- ↑ Dembski, William A.; Wells, Jonathan (2008). How to Be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (or not). Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books. p. 99. ISBN 978-1-933859-84-2.
