Part 1.9 - Appendix

APPENDIX.

NOTE TO PAGE 55.

What is a begging the question ? On this the reader will find no light, either in Whately, or in any other treatise on logic. Yet to know what it is is of the utmost moment in argument.

All logic is the endeavouring to prove to opponents that they are inconsistent with themselves, and unreasonable, if they accept not the conclusion we would enforce on them. We have then to shew that our conclusion is implied in the truths which they have already granted.

Then we shall prove them inconsistent with themselves^ if they allow not our conclusion. The propositions or truths granted are then the fulcrum on which we rest our lever of proof. But the premises granted are continually varying with the views of the parties against whom we are arguing.

Sometimes much is granted, and the process is easy and short. Sometimes little is yielded, and we have a long

190 and difficult process to carry through ere we reach our conclusion.

If, now, we assume as the basis of our argument a point or points which our antagonists do not grant, we are begging the question as to them. All logic then is an argumentum ad hominem : meaning thereby, not an individual only, but a special class, holding such and such views.

Suppose, now, that I am arguing that there will be a resurrection of the dead, with those who believe and grant, that the Scriptures are the inspired standard of truth. Then I am warranted in making any passages of the Old or of the New Testament the foundation of my reasoning.

But, if I am arguing with a Jew, and quote as decisive of my conclusion passages taken from the New Testament, / am begging the question; for he does not admit their inspiration. When Christ was proving the resurrection against the Sadducees, He takes His ground of proof neither from the prophets or the Hagiographa, because (we are informed) they allowed only the five books of Moses. He rests his proof, then, on a passage taken from the Pentateuch : and that ought to have satisfied them.

It is necessary, therefore, in every argument to know at the outset how much is granted by our opponents. That must be the basis of our proofs, or we beg the question, as far as they are concerned. Hence argu-

191 ments which are perfectly convincing to the Christian are of no force to the unbeliever. Before you can adduce the Scriptures as decisive, you must prove to him, on premises which he grants, that they are the inspired Word of God.

It is because of this constant variation of the data with the differing views of opponents, that it has escaped observation, or at least direct statement, wherein begging the question consists. THE END.

PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.