Chapter 3: Lecture Notes
Looking at Language
Chapter 3: Looking at Language
Language is an essential tool of thought and for arguments
as well. At every stage of constructing, understanding,
and evaluating argument we have to understand the
language.
It is much easier to use language than it is to think critically
about it. (57)
Phrases like: regime change or mankind can indicate that
there are assumptions that might not be legitimate. For
example, are all regimes bad? When talking of mankind
are we including women in the story? All of this will
matter when evaluating arguments.
Chapter 3
Use vs. Mention
One important distinction is the difference between using
words and talking about words. Consider the following
examples.
(a) New York is disyllabic.
(b) “New York” is disyllabic.
(a) is false because New York the city is not disyllabic. But
(b) is true because the word/phrase “New York” is a two
syllable name. In (a) we are using the word, in (b)
mentioning it.
Chapter 3
Emotionally Charged Language
Emotionally charged language is sometimes called “loaded
language” and it functions to create a mood or attitude
without argument or reasons.
Consider the difference in these two phrases:
(i) Diversion of funds
(ii) Reform
The first has a negative feel or attitude, but the second
does not.
Chapter 3
Neutrality in emotional tone with language is
probably impossible, and if possible would
make language boring.
Just because an argument has loaded
language in it does not mean that the
argument is meritless.
Chapter 3
Euphemism
A euphemism is a bland, abstract, or polite use of language
used to refer to something that would otherwise be
embarrassing, demeaning, appalling, or horrible.
Collateral damage is a euphemism for the killing of
innocents bystanders
Pushing up daisies and kicking the bucket are euphemisms
for death.
Chapter 3
Euphemisms are often funny:
vertically challenged for shot people
follically challenged for bald people
Euphemisms become a block to thought and understanding
when they are used to block aspects of reality involving
serious matters like harm, torture, false arrests, poverty,
war, and humiliation.
Chapter 3
Two types of unclear language that gives
rise to problems in arguments are:
Ambiguity and Vagueness
Chapter 3
Ambiguity occurs when a word or phrase may have several
meanings, any of which, could fit naturally in the context
being used. This newspaper headline for example,
“Home Delivery Sought”
There are several natural interpretations of this phrase,
which means it is ambiguous:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Giving birth at home instead of at the hospital
Getting mail delivered to residences
Having a house delivered
Context can matter and often solves the problem of
ambiguity for us in what interpretation to use.
Chapter 3
There are two basic types of ambiguity:
Semantic and Syntactic
Semantic ambiguity has to do with the meaning of the
words and occurs when there is more than one possible
meaning of the word in question.
Bank and right are two words with multiple meaning that
can give rise to ambiguous sentences if you don’t know
the context in question.
Chapter3
Syntactic ambiguity are due to issues of structure of a
phrase or the sentence.
“It is time for football and meatball stew”
Is syntactically ambiguous because of the linking of football
with meatball. Poor writing often gives rise to syntactic
ambiguity and this example could have been eliminated
if it had been written this way:
“It is time for meatball stew and football.”
Chapter 3
When an argument relies on or has an instance of
ambiguity in it, it is a mistaken in reasoning. When this
mistake occurs in an argument it is called the fallacy of
equivocation. For example:
I have the right to vote for higher taxes.
Therefore, I did the right thing voting for higher taxes.
In this case the word ‘right’ is being used in two sense, and
this means that the premise doesn’t support the
conclusion in the way intended by the author.
Chapter 3
Vagueness
Vagueness is a lack of distinctness of meaning.
To be contrasted with ambiguity, vagueness has unclear
meanings, while ambiguous words and phrases have
multiple meanings.
I have a big house is vague. Big is vague because there is
not clear sense in when a house is big. Three bedrooms
or 30 bedrooms. Big is used vaguely in this context.
Chapter 3
Understanding definitions is an important
part of understanding arguments. There
are several different kinds of definitions
that a person could give or use. We shall
look at several that are important to
evaluating arguments and language.
Chapter 3
Ostensive Definitions
In an ostensive definition of a word, X, we explain what X
means by pointing to an example of X.
Trying to give an English definition of a ‘cat’ would be
difficult. So, what we often do when we want to define a
word, like ‘cat’, is to point to the object – like a real cat.
Since one main goal of language is to relate words to the
real world, ostensive definitions work quite well.
Chapter 3
Reportive or Lexical Definitions
Reportive (lexical or dictionary) definitions have the goal of
accurately describing how a word is used in language.
Typically this is done by clearly explaining the properties a
things has. For a word like ‘chair’ it might report that a
chair is a “piece of furniture that is to seat one person” or
something similar.
It seems an easy task, but ‘chair’ can have other meanings.
Chapter 3
‘chair’ is also used in the following ways:
(i) As chair, she called the meeting to order.
(ii) The college established a chair of moral philosophy.
In (i) the chair is the person in charge of the meeting. In (ii)
the chair in question is an endowed professorship. So,
we will need some guidelines for creating good
reportive definitions.
Chapter 3
Reportive definition guidelines:
1. It is not too broad. That is to say, all things that the definition would have us
call X are called X in ordinary language
2. It is not too narrow. That is to say, all the things that are called X in ordinary
usage are called X according to the definition.
3. It is not couched solely in negative terms unless X itself is negative.
4. It defines the word X in terms of features required for a things to could as X
and not in terms of incidental features,
5. It uses terms that, for the most in need of a definition, will be clearer than
the term being defined.
6. It uses terms that are sufficiently removed from the term being defined that
it is not circular.
Chapter 3
Stipulative Definition
A stipulative definition is one in which someone specifies
what the usage of a word is.
This can be done for words like rich or tall. I could define
tall for a man as over 6 feet. This would be a stipulative
definition.
When a person tries to win an argument by defining the
terms how they like instead of how they are used, it is an
instance of victory by definition and is a kind of fallacy.
Chapter 3
Persuasive Definition
A persuasive definition is a stipulative definition disguised
as a claim or as a reportive definition.
These kinds of definitions attempt to keep the emotional
connotation of a word while changing its application.
So, freedom fighters as a term for rebels or terrorists or
assassins is an example of a persuasive definition.
Chapter 3
Operational Definitions
Operational definitions are a kind of stipulative definition
most often used in scientific research.
For example,
A substance is soluble if, and only if, it dissolves when
placed in water.
So, soluble is defined operationally.
Chapter 3
Terms to review:
Ambiguity
Argument by epithet
Connotation
Denotation
Emotionally charged language
Fallacy
Fallacy of equivocation
Figurative meaning
Lexical Definition
Literal meaning
Loaded language
Mention (of a word)
Neutral Language
Operational Definition
Ostensive definition
Chapter 3
Terms to review continued:
Persuasive definition
Semantic ambiguity
Syntactic ambiguity
Reportive definition
Stipulative definition
Vagueness