Talk:Fallacy of exclusive premises

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Some fish are not whales?[edit]

Um, all fish are not whales. Angryapathy (talk) 18:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I've changed the example to address this. Dcwaterboy (talk) 18:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
"All fishes are not whales," is an E proposition without existential import in Boolean logic.--478jjjz (talk) 22:23, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
This is still confusing the example. The minor premise, Some Fish are not whales, is only true if "Fish" is intended in a non-scientific sense, as in sea creatures, or things that live in water. However, the major premise is only true if "Fish" is intended in a scientific sense, as clearly there are indeed mammals that live in water. Thus, regardless of the intention to use it as an example of a syllogistic fallacy, we never reach a clear understanding of why, due to encountering a Fallacy of Equivocation in the premises themselves. This example needs to be changed to something that is *only* a Fallacy of Exclusive Premises. Memige (talk) 21:54, 10 July 2014 (UTC)