Difference between revisions of "Ambiguity"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DisplayImages|3389}} | {{DisplayImages|3389}} | ||
| − | In an [[ambiguity | + | In an [[ambiguity fallacy]] a [[word]] or [[phrase]] is used uncleanly. There are two ways in which this may occur: |
* The [[word]] or [[phrase]] may be {{Wiki|ambiguous}}, in which case it has more than one {{Wiki|distinct}} meaning. | * The [[word]] or [[phrase]] may be {{Wiki|ambiguous}}, in which case it has more than one {{Wiki|distinct}} meaning. | ||
Latest revision as of 05:03, 10 September 2014
In an ambiguity fallacy a word or phrase is used uncleanly. There are two ways in which this may occur:
- The word or phrase may be ambiguous, in which case it has more than one distinct meaning.
- The word or phrase may be vague, in which case it has no distinct meaning.
Equivocation
The same word is used with two different meanings. For example:
"Criminal actions are illegal, and all murder trials are criminal actions, thus all murder trials are illegal."
"The sign said 'fine for parking here', and since it was fine, I parked there."
