Surf Wiki
Save to docs
general/verbal-fallacies

From Surf Wiki (app.surf) — the open knowledge base

Fallacy of division

Fallacy

Summary

Fallacy

reasoning that draws a conclusion by parting an inseparably unified total

The fallacy of division{{cite web |title= Division

An example:

  1. The second grade in Jefferson Elementary eats a lot of ice cream
  2. Carlos is a second-grader in Jefferson Elementary
  3. Therefore, Carlos eats a lot of ice cream

The converse of this fallacy is the fallacy of composition, which arises when one fallaciously attributes a property of some part of a thing to the thing as a whole.

If a system as a whole has some property that none of its constituents has (or perhaps, it has it but not as a result of some constituents having that property), this is sometimes called an emergent property of the system.

The term mereological fallacy refers to approximately the same incorrect inference that properties of a whole are also properties of its parts.

History

Both the fallacy of division and the fallacy of composition were addressed by Aristotle in Sophistical Refutations.

In the philosophy of the ancient Greek Anaxagoras, as claimed by the Roman atomist Lucretius, it was assumed that the atoms constituting a substance must themselves have the salient observed properties of that substance: so atoms of water would be wet, atoms of iron would be hard, atoms of wool would be soft, etc. This doctrine is called homoeomeria, and it depends on the fallacy of division.

Examples in statistics

In statistics, an ecological fallacy is a logical fallacy in the interpretation of statistical data where inferences about the nature of individuals are deduced from inference for the group to which those individuals belong. The four common statistical ecological fallacies are: confusion between ecological correlations and individual correlations, confusion between group average and total average, Simpson's paradox, and other statistical methods.

References

References

  1. M. R. Bennett; P. M. S. Hacker. 2003. ''Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience''. [http://info.sjc.ox.ac.uk/scr/hacker/docs/contents_PhiloFndtns_Neurosci.pdf Table of contents].
  2. Rom Harré. [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/behind-the-mereological-fallacy1/44615986E9F6FF6BD30A354FA22E58D3 Behind the Mereological Fallacy]. ''Philosophy'' 87:3, July 2012, pp. 329-352. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819112000241
  3. P.M.S. Hacker. 2013. [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/before-the-mereological-fallacy-a-rejoinder-to-rom-harre/BA5F9C392BEE94903F7BAC00686B1F91 Before the Mereological Fallacy: A Rejoinder to Rom Harré]. ''Philosophy'', 88(1), 141-148. doi:10.1017/S003181911200054X
  4. H. Van Eyghen. 2023. [https://pure.uvt.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/92231841/Brain_perceives_infers.pdf The Brain Perceives. The Brain infers]. ''Wittgenstein and the Cognitive Science of Religion'', 53-72. doi:10.5040/9781350329386.0011
  5. Brauneis, Robert. (2009). "Intellectual Property Protection of Fact-based Works: Copyright and Its Alternatives". Edward Elgar Publishing.
  6. Burnham Terrell, Dailey. (1967). "Logic: A Modern Introduction to Deductive Reasoning". Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Wikipedia Source

This article was imported from Wikipedia and is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Content has been adapted to SurfDoc format. Original contributors can be found on the article history page.

verbal-fallacies relevance-fallacies
Want to explore this topic further?

Ask Mako anything about Fallacy of division — get instant answers, deeper analysis, and related topics.

Research with Mako

Free with your Surf account

Content sourced from Wikipedia, available under CC BY-SA 4.0.

This content may have been generated or modified by AI. CloudSurf Software LLC is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of AI-generated content. Always verify important information from primary sources.

Report