click here to learn more about being redeemed from sin and set free to serve God in spirit and in truth. click here to learn more about holiness click here to learn more about being changed into the same image click here to learn more about sowing and reaping click here to learn more about the free gift of righteousness. click here to learn more about how faith gives us access to grace and grace does the works. click here to learn more about faith and how it comes. click here to learn more about acknowledging Jesus click here to learn more about how God speaks Who will you listen to?  Click here to learn more. click here to learn more about the pattern of God. click here to learn more about the pattern of God for individuals, marriage, and family. click here to learn more about the pattern of God for the local church click here to learn more about the Church universal
 
SeekFind Logo Menu

Logical Fallacy of Composition / Exception Fallacy

 

Logical Fallacy of Composition / Exception Fallacy

The exception fallacy is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. There is no reason to trust either logic or math without Divine revelation. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. This is a fallacy that superimposes another level of fallacy on top or one or more of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma.

The logical fallacy of composition occurs when a person reasons that the properties of the parts will be the properties of the whole.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Composition / Exception Fallacy

Sandra: "When I sin, it is fun, so I’m going to have fun sinning all my life."

Roxanne: "The fleshly nature does love to sin; that is true. However, the wages of sin is death, and that death happens far sooner than physical death. Sin will take you farther than you wanted to go, keep you there longer than you wanted to stay, and cost more than you ever thought it would cost."

Note that this person, whether a Christian or not, is applying the properties of the moment to the entire future. This is the fallacy of composition.

Sandy: "We can observe minor changes from generation to generation in living things, so it follows that those minor changes will build up over time to the point where a single cell eventually changes into more complex living things and those increasingly complex things become a human being."

Rocky: "Small changes don’t necessarily add up to huge changes. One would ask why there are no examples, either in living things or in fossils, of one kind of living thing turning into another kind of living thing. There would be evidence of millions of transitional forms among the fossils, so many that they wouldn’t even show a distinction between kinds of animals like dogs and cats, however, such evidence is absolutely missing which might make even the most staunch Atheistic Evolutionist wonder. Not only that, but there is no mechanism to make the conclusion happen. The changes we observe are losses in information, duplication of already-existing information, and distortion of information. Some of the distorted information is slight enough that it doesn’t immediately kill the organism, but, if degradation continues, extinction occurs. New, innovative information would need to be added to cells for even the smallest step in molecules-to-man evolution. So, what we see scientifically points to creation rather than evolution, and it doesn’t’ make sense to use the fallacy of composition as supposed “proof” for molecules-to-man evolution."

Sandy was obviously using the fallacy of composition to try to convince Rocky. Good thing that Rocky was well informed. Had Rocky not been fully informed, he would only have to realize that this is the fallacy of composition presented as deceitful "proof."

Sandy: "I knew two Christians who were hypocrites. Christians are hypocrites."

Roxanne: "If we define hypocrite very broadly, every Christian’s natural, carnal mind is a hypocrite. However, by that definition of hypocrite, every person is a hypocrite, and the word is being defined so broadly that it has no meaning any more. The person who would make such a statement may have one definition for hypocrite when referring to himself/herself and another definition when referring to Christians, which is a fallacy of equivocation in itself. I'll assume you are a person who has actually been turned off by some people who label themselves as Christians but don’t really believe or follow Christ. If these two Christians who in some way offended you are indeed insincere in their Chrisian walk--that's what a hypocrit is--they are still part of the group called Christians (as long as we use a very broad definition of the word, Christian). The trouble then becomes the logical fallacy of composition which applies the attributes of the part to the whole. You knew two Christians who didn't meet your approval, and now you want to apply the actions of these two to every person who follows Christ."

This is not an uncommon application of the logical fallacy of composition to attack the work of the Holy Spirit.



Author/Compiler
Last updated: Sep, 2014
 
 




Bread Crumbs

 
Home     >   Meaning     >   Christian Witness     >   Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies     >   Fallacies of Ambiguity     >   Composition / Exception Fallacy

Main

Foundations

Home

Meaning

Bible

Dictionary

History

Toons & Vids

Quotations

Similar

Logical Fallacy of Ambiguity

Logical Fallacy of the Barnum Effect / P. T. Barnum Effect / The Fallacy of Personal Validation / The Forer Effect

Logical Fallacy of Ambiguous Assertion

Logical Fallacy of Innuendo

Sly Suggestion Fallacy

Syntactic Ambiguity Fallacy / Structural Ambiguity / Grammatical Ambiguity / Amphiboly / Semantic Ambiguity / Semantical Ambiguity Fallacy

The Logical Fallacy Lexical Ambiguity

Homonymy

Shingle Speech

Use-Mention Error / UME

Double Entendre

Logical Fallacy of Misuse of Etymology

Logical Fallacy of Garden Path Ambiguity

Squinting Modifier Fallacy

Quantifier Fallacy / Quantifier Shift Fallacy

Illicit Observation Fallacy

Metaphorical Ambiguity Fallacy

Euphemism

Logical Fallacy of Equivocation / Bait and Switch / Amphiboly / Semantic Ambiguity / Type-Token Ambiguity / Vagueness

Redefinition Fallacy

Middle Puzzle Part Fallacy

Idiosyncratic Language Fallacy

Type-Token Ambiguity Fallacy

Fallacy of Modal Logic / Modal Scope Fallacy / Misconditionalization

Modal Fallacy / Modal Scope Fallacy

Scope Fallacy

Ambiguous Middle / Ambiguous Middle Term

Logical Fallacy of Hypnotic Bait and Switch

Definist Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Defining a Word in Terms of Itself

Socratic Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Defining Terms Too Broadly

Logical Fallacy of Defining Terms Too Narrowly

Logical Fallacy of Failure to Elucidate

Logical Fallacy of Persuasive Definition / Appeal to Definition / Appeal to the Dictionary / Definist Fallacy (type of) / Rhetorical Definition

Logical Fallacy of Composition / Exception Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Division / False Division / Ecological Fallacy / Ecological Inference Fallacy

Etymological Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Nominalization, Misnomer, Labeling

Logical Fallacy of Inference from a Label

Pigeonholing Fallacy / Ahistoric Fallacy

Category Mistake / Category Error

Logical Fallacy of the Conjunction Effect / Conjunction Fallacy

Disjunction Fallacy

Logical Fallacy of Argument by Fast Talking / Information Overload / Bang-Bang-Bang

Logical Fallacy of Proof by Verbosity / Argumentum Verbosium

Logical Fallacy of Argument by Gibberish / Bafflement / Prestigious Jargon

Logical Fallacy of Confusing Contradiction with Contrariety

Logical Fallacy of Ambiguous Collective / Type-Token Ambiguity

Conceptual Fallacy

Anti-Concreteness Mentality Fallacy / Attributing Abstractness to the Concrete / Mistaking an Entity for a Theory / Mistaking Reality for an Assumptions

Butterfly Logic

The Logical Fallacy of Process-Product Ambiguity / Act-Object Ambiguity


Recent

Home

Answer to Critic

Appeal to Possibility

Circular Reasoning

Argument to the Future

Insignificant Cause

Word Magic

Love Between a Man and Woman

Author/Compiler

Colossians 2

Righteousness & Holiness

Don't Compromise

Sin

Proof by Atheism

Scriptures About Marriage

Genuine Authority

The Reason for Rejecting Truth

Witness on the Internet

Flaky Human Reasoning

How Do You Know?



Featured


The Real Purpose of the Church

The Real Purpose of Life

From Glory to Glory

REAL Faith--What it IS & IS NOT

REAL Love--What it IS & IS NOT

How to be Led by God

How to Witness

Wisdom: Righteousness & Reality

Holiness & Mind/Soul

Redemption: Free From Sin

Real Reality

Stories Versus Revelation

Understanding Logic

Logical Fallacies

Circular Reasoning-Who is Guilty?

How Can We Know Anything?

God's Word

God's Process

God's Pattern

Mind Designed to Relate to God

Answers for the Confused

Fossil Record Says: "Creation"

Avoid These Pitfalls

Public School's Religion

Twisting Science

Evolutionism

Public School Failures

Twisting History


How can we know anything about anything? That's the real question

more info: mouseover or click

The complexity of Gods Way understood in a single diagram
Obey your flesh and descend into darkness