| Context Imposition |
|
You are here:
Meaning
>
Christian Witness
>
Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies
>
Flawed Evidence
>
Context Imposition
|
Logical Fallacy of Context ImpositionWhenever 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 regression, 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. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Context imposition 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. The Logical Fallacy of Context Imposition occurs when argument is made from one’s own position without acknowledging the existence of other possibilities. This is an attempt to impose one’s own context on another person. Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Context Imposition
Here is an example that shows the difference. Rocky doesn’t try to impose his own experience on Sandy, but he instructs Sandy as to how Sandy can check it out. On the other hand, Sandy tries to impose his worldview and uncheckable assumption onto Rocky.
Sandy is convinced of something but is unable to explain why. This is because of Sandy's worldview. Sandy's worldview (paradigm/filter/fake-reality) seems more real to him than real reality. Whatever is in any person's worldview seems to be self-evident. It seems to be reality, so it acts as a filter to keep out conflicting observations. When a person's worldview is contradicted in any way, the contradiction will seem bazaar and unreal. The tendency, then, is to reject the conflict and keep the worldview. It is very difficult to overcome a worldview. Pointing out conflicts with reality may work, but not right a way. Pointing out that the worldview is in conflict with itself may help, but not right away. Ad hoc hypotheses are used as rescuing mechanisms to save worldviews from destruction. Most people will cut off conversations and refuse to think about their own self-conflicting worldviews or parts of their worldviews that are not in harmony with real reality.
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question |
Other Pages in this sectionProof by Fallacy Evidence Surrogate Error in Observation Misrepresenting the Facts Distorted Evidence Unverified Evidence Hysteron Proteron Unsubstantiated Inference Assuming Facts Not In Evidence Wishful Thinking Appeal to Worldview Slippery Slope Limited Scope Mind Reading Shoehorning Confirmation Bias Sacred Cow Fantasy Projection Group Think Psychologist\'s Fallacy Amazing Familiarity Stolen Concept Weak Inference Proof by Theoretical Stories Anecdotal Evidence Dismissing All Personal Testimony Rewriting History Proof by Model Proof by Assumption Personal Incredulity Argument by Lack of Imagination Argument by Imagination Capturing the Naive Argument from Personal Astonishment Special Pleading Variant Imagization Self-Exclusion Unintended Self-Inclusion Ad Personam Proof by Repeated Assertion Cherishing the Zombie Argumentum Ad Lapidem Understatement Tautology Declaring Victory Assumption Correction Assumption Questionable Criteria Summary Dismissal Thought-Terminating Cliche Truism Perfectionist Fallacy Worst Case Scenario Fallacy Unwarranted Extrapolation Untestability Subjectivist Fallacy Bizarre Hypothesis Least Plausible Hypothesis Extravagant Hypothesis Privileging the Hypothesis Canceling Hypotheses Appeal to False Faith False Appeal to Heaven Inaccurate Models Hedging Politician\'s \"We\" Appeal to Nature Experimenter Bias Crucial Experiment Hearsay Ad Hoc Rescue Hindsight Bias Fallacy of the Beard Argument from Fallacy Inflation of Conflict Infinite Regress Reification Personification Slothful Induction Superstitious Thinking Meaningless Question Proving Non-Existence Argumentum ad Imaginibus Statement of Conversion Outdated Information Argument by Laziness Alien Fallacy Quantum Physics Fallacy Fallacious Abstraction Appeal to the Unknown Grasping at Straws Pragmatism Fake Hope Appeal to Intuition Appeal to Mystery Argument from Design Untestability Imaginary Evidence Monopolizing the Question Fallacy of Antecedent Faulty Predictor Pretentious Antecedent Pretentious Premise Recently Viewed |
