Pretentious Antecedent
Pretentious antecedent 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.
The Logical Fallacy of Pretentious Antecedent occurs when the first part of a hypothetical proposition is either merely assumed momentarily or is just briefly mentioned then, later, it is treated as if it were a fully proven fact.
Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Pretentious Antecedent
During a recent debate in which Bill Nye was arguing against Creation science, he used this method for several points at once. At the start of the debate, he spoke in fuzzy, non-distinct terms about several propositions. As the debate progressed, he began to become more dogmatic. By the end, he spoke of these propositions as if he had somehow proven them to be facts.
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question
|
