Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Attention smokers--Junk food has you addicted to cigarettes
by epsom Today at 6:13 pm

» One For The Gardeners
by aarons1950 Today at 5:39 pm

» The Solution
by iamani Today at 3:30 pm

» SATIRE--Man Sends Audition Tape To Globalists To Be Crisis Actor in Next False Flag
by actinglikeabanker Today at 2:55 pm

» IS JEREMY CORBYN A PAEDOPHILE?
by Society of the Spectacle Today at 1:46 pm

» Processed meats or cigarettes – which gives you cancer more quickly?
by Lopsum Today at 1:26 pm

» Barcelona Attack ??
by iamani Today at 1:21 pm

» 24 Storey Tower on Fire in Kensington - dies
by iamani Today at 12:54 pm

» DECEIVED-INTO-CONSENT
by iamani Today at 11:56 am

» ccscollect
by Waffle Today at 10:27 am

» HEAL YOURSELF natural remedies to all illness
by ceylon Today at 9:09 am

» DO YOU WANT TO STOP SMOKING? Mix THIS With Orange Juice to Flush Nicotine Out Of Your Body!
by ceylon Today at 9:08 am

» Barclaycard
by Jinxer Yesterday at 11:38 pm

» Lowell Court Claim & Mediation
by petesomething Yesterday at 9:57 pm

» Robinson Way
by curvy63 Yesterday at 8:18 pm

» Unlawful / Unjust Enrichment
by Society of the Spectacle Yesterday at 7:58 pm

» 3 Letters Posted - Credit Agreement
by daveiron Yesterday at 6:14 pm

» Deed of Assignment Vs Notice of Assignment
by Tiggy Yesterday at 1:05 pm

» Copyright declaration & notice
by joedalton Yesterday at 9:54 am

» Nottingham Meeting for Free Thinkers 19 August 2017
by Boudica Yesterday at 9:44 am

» Moorcroft chasing 1200
by LionsShare Yesterday at 8:47 am

» What If We Merge Human and Machine
by daveiron Yesterday at 7:56 am

» 'Help needed' standardised questionnaire
by 1saberwow Yesterday at 7:29 am

» Removing splinters with bicarbonate of soda
by Lopsum Yesterday at 6:29 am

» Good afternoon
by joedalton Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:05 pm

» The 12 biggest SCIENCE LIES you’ve been told by corporations, government and the corrupt media
by epsom Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:47 pm

» The 3 Letters
by petesomething Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:04 pm

» University fees a Ponzi scheme
by ceylon Thu Aug 17, 2017 4:23 pm

» Urgent one!!! Debt Managers.
by Stevro Thu Aug 17, 2017 3:49 pm

» Is this evidence of liability?
by Stevro Thu Aug 17, 2017 2:46 pm

» I need your help
by curvy63 Thu Aug 17, 2017 2:29 pm

» Liability order council tax
by sirus0 Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:43 pm

» Principles of Private Law - Australia
by actinglikeabanker Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:30 pm

» Court Claim Forms
by Tiggy Thu Aug 17, 2017 11:45 am

» Communication after Estoppel
by Stevro Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:37 am

» Anyone won in court using the 3 letters as a defence?
by Stevro Thu Aug 17, 2017 6:20 am

» Are they gearing up to go to war?
by Jinxer Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:59 pm


Sophistical Refutations

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Sophistical Refutations

Post by actinglikeabanker on Sat Jun 17, 2017 1:55 am

Sophistical Refutations

By Aristotle

Written 350 B.C.E

Translated by W. A. Pickard-Cambridge


http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/sophist_refut.1.1.html

Let us now discuss sophistic refutations, i.e. what appear to be refutations but are really fallacies instead. We will begin in the natural order with the first.

That some reasonings are genuine, while others seem to be so but are not, is evident. This happens with arguments, as also elsewhere, through a certain likeness between the genuine and the sham. For physically some people are in a vigorous condition, while others merely seem to be so by blowing and rigging themselves out as the tribesmen do their victims for sacrifice; and some people are beautiful thanks to their beauty, while others seem to be so, by dint of embellishing themselves. So it is, too, with inanimate things; for of these, too, some are really silver and others gold, while others are not and merely seem to be such to our sense; e.g. things made of litharge and tin seem to be of silver, while those made of yellow metal look golden. In the same way both reasoning and refutation are sometimes genuine, sometimes not, though inexperience may make them appear so: for inexperienced people obtain only, as it were, a distant view of these things. For reasoning rests on certain statements such that they involve necessarily the assertion of something other than what has been stated, through what has been stated: refutation is reasoning involving the contradictory of the given conclusion. Now some of them do not really achieve this, though they seem to do so for a number of reasons; and of these the most prolific and usual domain is the argument that turns upon names only. It is impossible in a discussion to bring in the actual things discussed: we use their names as symbols instead of them; and therefore we suppose that what follows in the names, follows in the things as well, just as people who calculate suppose in regard to their counters. But the two cases (names and things) are not alike. For names are finite and so is the sum-total of formulae, while things are infinite in number. Inevitably, then, the same formulae, and a single name, have a number of meanings. Accordingly just as, in counting, those who are not clever in manipulating their counters are taken in by the experts, in the same way in arguments too those who are not well acquainted with the force of names misreason both in their own discussions and when they listen to others. For this reason, then, and for others to be mentioned later, there exists both reasoning and refutation that is apparent but not real. Now for some people it is better worth while to seem to be wise, than to be wise without seeming to be (for the art of the sophist is the semblance of wisdom without the reality, and the sophist is one who makes money from an apparent but unreal wisdom); for them, then, it is clearly essential also to seem to accomplish the task of a wise man rather than to accomplish it without seeming to do so. To reduce it to a single point of contrast it is the business of one who knows a thing, himself to avoid fallacies in the subjects which he knows and to be able to show up the man who makes them; and of these accomplishments the one depends on the faculty to render an answer, and the other upon the securing of one. Those, then, who would be sophists are bound to study the class of arguments aforesaid: for it is worth their while: for a faculty of this kind will make a man seem to be wise, and this is the purpose they happen to have in view.

Clearly, then, there exists a class of arguments of this kind, and it is at this kind of ability that those aim whom we call sophists. Let us now go on to discuss how many kinds there are of sophistical arguments, and how many in number are the elements of which this faculty is composed, and how many branches there happen to be of this inquiry, and the other factors that contribute to this art......
avatar
actinglikeabanker
Not so newb
Not so newb

Posts : 340
Join date : 2017-05-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Sophistical Refutations

Post by iamani on Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:10 pm

Hi actinglikeabanker

So the root of sophistry lies in pride?

Cheers!

iamani
Not so newb
Not so newb

Posts : 399
Join date : 2017-05-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Sophistical Refutations

Post by actinglikeabanker on Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:57 pm

Hey iamani, I suppose it depends on your viewpoint.

First and foremost, you would need to define the context of 'pride'. Laughing

avatar
actinglikeabanker
Not so newb
Not so newb

Posts : 340
Join date : 2017-05-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Sophistical Refutations

Post by iamani on Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:02 pm

Hi actinglikeabanker

Oh yes, i see... i think....

Cheers!

iamani
Not so newb
Not so newb

Posts : 399
Join date : 2017-05-01

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum