[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17197.msg199279#msg199279 date=1504671031]
Begging the question = assuming the conclusion
Begging the question ≠ raising the question

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

I only brought it up because misuse of the phrase was one of Mick's pet peeves.

Well, yes, but it seemed a shorter more direct response.

I did find this line in the Wikipedia article amusing,
"In contexts that demand strict adherence to a technical definition of the term, many consider these usages incorrect." [these usages are "beg the question" = "raise the question"]

While the phrase comes out of classical Greek dialectics, and apparently a mistranslation thereof, it is not clear to me that a colloquial phrase can have a technical definition or just what would be a context that would demand strict adherence. The footnote in Wikipedia implies that context is the New York Times.

Later on, the article implies that the phrase may have technical legal or philosophical meaning - though the quotations seem to end up with grammarians. I am sure we have lawyers here, not sure about professional philosophers.
Does anyone know if "begging the question" is a technical phrase in these fields?
[/quote]

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?...#msg199119

In the article referenced in the post, I found the following rather funny point:

Even if "assuming the conclusion" is something that people often want to say, "begging the question" is such a confusing way to say it that only a few pedants understand the phrase in this sense any more.
You can see that this is true by looking at how the phrase is used, even in well-edited sources. For example, if we search the NYT index for recent uses of "beg the question", we find that out of the first 20 hits, 15 use "beg the question" to mean "raise the question" — and of the five that don't, four are usage articles berating people for misusing the phrase!

I liked the author's concluding suggestion:

My recommendation: Never use the phrase yourself — use "assume the conclusion" or "raise the question", depending on what you mean — and cultivate an attitude of serene detachment in the face of its use by others.

My own usage of the term was just a nod to Mick, who noted that its misuse was a pet peeve of his.  Sorry about the in joke.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17197.msg199279#msg199279 date=1504671031]
Begging the question = assuming the conclusion
Begging the question ≠ raising the question

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

I only brought it up because misuse of the phrase was one of Mick's pet peeves.

Well, yes, but it seemed a shorter more direct response.

I did find this line in the Wikipedia article amusing,
"In contexts that demand strict adherence to a technical definition of the term, many consider these usages incorrect." [these usages are "beg the question" = "raise the question"]

While the phrase comes out of classical Greek dialectics, and apparently a mistranslation thereof, it is not clear to me that a colloquial phrase can have a technical definition or just what would be a context that would demand strict adherence. The footnote in Wikipedia implies that context is the New York Times.

Later on, the article implies that the phrase may have technical legal or philosophical meaning - though the quotations seem to end up with grammarians. I am sure we have lawyers here, not sure about professional philosophers.
Does anyone know if "begging the question" is a technical phrase in these fields?
[/quote]

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?...#msg199119

In the article referenced in the post, I found the following rather funny point:

Even if "assuming the conclusion" is something that people often want to say, "begging the question" is such a confusing way to say it that only a few pedants understand the phrase in this sense any more.
You can see that this is true by looking at how the phrase is used, even in well-edited sources. For example, if we search the NYT index for recent uses of "beg the question", we find that out of the first 20 hits, 15 use "beg the question" to mean "raise the question" — and of the five that don't, four are usage articles berating people for misusing the phrase!

I liked the author's concluding suggestion:

My recommendation: Never use the phrase yourself — use "assume the conclusion" or "raise the question", depending on what you mean — and cultivate an attitude of serene detachment in the face of its use by others.

My own usage of the term was just a nod to Mick, who noted that its misuse was a pet peeve of his.  Sorry about the in joke.

BC

[Mick]

My recommendation: Never use the phrase yourself — use "assume the conclusion" or "raise the question", depending on what you mean — and cultivate an attitude of serene detachment in the face of its use by others.

My own usage of the term was just a nod to Mick, who noted that its misuse was a pet peeve of his.  Sorry about the in joke.

BC

Per the author's recommendation, and after some meditation, I am now serenely detached whenever I hear "begging the question."  Thanks, BC!!

[Mick]

My recommendation: Never use the phrase yourself — use "assume the conclusion" or "raise the question", depending on what you mean — and cultivate an attitude of serene detachment in the face of its use by others.

My own usage of the term was just a nod to Mick, who noted that its misuse was a pet peeve of his.  Sorry about the in joke.

BC

Per the author's recommendation, and after some meditation, I am now serenely detached whenever I hear "begging the question."  Thanks, BC!!

[fullmetal]

I know $C is better than WMU.  I see a close U$C win.  I look at how the game progressed and how the scoring happened.  I see more low-probability scores on the part of WMU.  Hence I conclude that $C is better than the score indicates.

I think you've just tried to reword my conclusion into something else.  Is it really worth all this time to try to make me look wrong?  Fine, whatever.

As for "fluky play," I think any fan of football can agree that pick-sixes and whiffed tackles happen much more often than kickoff returns for TDs or double-pass QB reception trick plays.  Or are you really going to try to equate their frequencies?

[fullmetal]

I know $C is better than WMU.  I see a close U$C win.  I look at how the game progressed and how the scoring happened.  I see more low-probability scores on the part of WMU.  Hence I conclude that $C is better than the score indicates.

I think you've just tried to reword my conclusion into something else.  Is it really worth all this time to try to make me look wrong?  Fine, whatever.

As for "fluky play," I think any fan of football can agree that pick-sixes and whiffed tackles happen much more often than kickoff returns for TDs or double-pass QB reception trick plays.  Or are you really going to try to equate their frequencies?