date

1819 Aug. 18 Note Fallacies 4 Ch.
1819 Aug. 18 Note

Fallacies 4 Ch. 2 Question-beggars

Note

An instrument of no small usefulness to the purposes /advancement/ of morality, public and private, would be a Table of appellatives in which under the two heads eulogistic and dyslogistic, added to the corresponding head neutral, all those words which in this way are liable to be converted into /used as/ instruments of fallacy should be ranged.

I hereby venture to /the amusement to/ recommend it to any one of those, who to the love of mankind, or the desire of obtaining /earning/ the reputation of it, add to a sufficient relish for such a task the requisite leisure. Not only in the scale of importance /utility/, but in the scale of difficulty, how much higher would such an exercise stand than those dictionaries of synonymies indiscriminately taken, which however are by no means without their difficulty any more than without their use.

For the due composition of such a work, logical acumen, in no inconsiderable quantity, may be found necessary.

In some instances, correspondent to the eulogistic or dyslogistic appellative, it may turn out that the language does not at present furnish any word that continues to preserve its neutral sense. This may perhaps be found to be the case with the abovementioned words adduced as examples of eulogistic appellatives: namely honour and glory, dignity and liberality. In the case of howsoever liberality though when the act is exercised at the expence of the public the term depredation[?] may with strict propriety be applied to that same act, yet the two terms the one eulogistic the other dyslogistic can not with propriety be stated as synonymous: and so in the case /instance/ of dignity national dignity if on this occasion, as is so naturally and

frequently

frequently the case, it should turn out that an /the/ act which had been termed an act /expression/ of national dignity was really an expression of official and diplomatic insolence, having for its object the plunging the nation into a needless and groundless war for the profit of those who looked to have the conduct of it.
Similar Items
  • Title: [Ch.| | Question-begging-denomination-employer]
    Description: Ch.| | Question-begging-denomination-employer's device

    or Eulogistic and Dyslogistic-appellative-employer's device. a

    or Laudatory and vituperative appellation-employer's device

    a See the nature of these denominations amply illustrated in Spring-of-Action Table.

    Of the field of thought and action the moral department though it be that part in which the most abundant employment is given to the instrument of deception here in question - is not, it will be seen, the only part. Scarcely perhaps can any part be found, to which it has not been applied.

    §. 1. Exposition.

    Among the appellatives employed for the designation of objects belonging to the field of moral science, there are some by which the object is presented singly, unaccompanied by any sentiment of approbation or disapprobation attached to it - as desire, labour. With reference to the two sorts of appellatives which will come immediately to be mentioned, appellatives of this sort may be termed neutral.

    In the margin, Bentham has noted at this point: ‘ For examples, look over the Table of Motives. Refer to Introd. and Dum:

    ‘1819 Aug. 10. See now Spring of Action Table.’

    There are others by means of which in addition to the principal object the idea of general approbation, as habitually attached to that object, is presented: - as industry. These are termed eulogistic.

    Others there are again, by and by means of which in addition to the principal object the idea of general disapprobation, as habitually attached to that same object is presented: - as lust. These may be termed dyslogistic.
  • Title: [1819 Aug. 5. Fallacies 4 Classification]
    Description: 1819 Aug. 5.

    Fallacies 4 Classification or

    Arrangement

    4

    1 Fallacies or Arguments ad judicium - Fallacies addressed to the judgement or judicial faculty, and having, always[?] for their tendency and frequently for their intended effect, the misleading it.

    To this head or class be found /may perhaps be seen/ to belong the following fallacies.

    1. Question-beggers device: or say, Eulogistic and Dyslogistic-appellative brandishers device; or say Laudative and Vituperative appellative /denomination/ brandishers device. In the case under the guise of a single term an entire proposition is added to it is smuggled in, and /being/ ladden in the belly /substances/ of it

    Take for instance the word faction. By the word faction is conveyed the idea of a political party: and attached to /and included in/ that idea is the assertion made the intimation given that of its being a pernicious party a party of a bad complexion, and acting in prosecution of bad designs. In this then we see an example of a vituperative, condemnatory, vituperative or say a dyslogistic epithet. We see moreover an /one and the most efficient/ exemplification of the sort of fallacy commonly called in Latin petitio principio /from the the logicians of it[?]/ in English, the begging of the question, that is, begging of the thing in question - of the matter in dispute: begging, or rather secret /clandestine/ assumption of the matter in dispute.

     Insert before this an example of a eulogistic appellative
  • Title: [Jan\T y T\ 1811 11 Eitherside]
    Description: Jan\T

    y

    T\ 1811 11 Eitherside

    Fallacies Ch | | Dyslogistic

    3 3

    3. Further instructions &c.

    It.[?] Davy and word not against By this [...?] no human interest

    Examples of dyslogistic terms[?] this employed

    1. Neutral form, change: dyslogistic, innovation.

    2. Neutral term again change: dyslogistic, subversion.

    By the use of the word subversion the endeavour is to cause the change to be regarded as not only mischievous, but extensive: so extensive as to be even all-comprehensive.

    The proposed subject, be it what it may, of the proposed change is to be regarded as if it were an edifice. To subvert an edifice is to overturn it by a form applied under the bottom of it: of the change they produced, whatsoever be the particular description, thus much is clear that supposing the whole of it thus dealt with, there can not remain any apartment in it fit for use. By the use of this word /in a word it will have been destroyed the destruction of it will have been the effect/ to subvert or subversion, this much is required of you, namely that be the imaginary edifice what it may such will be the effect which by the change in question will be produced in it.

    Of late years, discourses, which, having for part of their object and their effect the exposure and frustration of these frustration of these fallacies by which words /appellations/ are employed for the purpose of deception have been sold cheap have by those who are interested in the support of the deception been distinguished /designated/ by the name of two penny track. But howsoever dyslogistic the term may be, let the discerning readers determine whether to all discourses, in so far as their reliance on this or any other abuse of words, the appellative trash may well not with propriety be applied, whatsoever be the price asked and given for them.