Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: About respect [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)83. "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
Just since I don't see anyone else mentioning it, doesn't mean nobody realized your question isn't a question at all, it's an attack.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question which contains a controversial or unjustified assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt).[1]
Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.[2] The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Whether the respondent answers yes or no, they will admit to having a wife and having beaten her at some time in the past. Thus, these facts are presupposed by the question, and in this case an entrapment, because it narrows the respondent to a single answer, and the fallacy of many questions has been committed.[2] The fallacy relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a question presupposes something does not in itself make the question fallacious. Only when some of these presuppositions are not necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question does the argument containing them become fallacious.[2] Hence the same question may be loaded in one context, but not in the other. For example the previous question would not be loaded if it was asked during a trial in which the defendant has already admitted to beating his wife.[2]
Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.[2] The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Whether the respondent answers yes or no, they will admit to having a wife and having beaten her at some time in the past. Thus, these facts are presupposed by the question, and in this case an entrapment, because it narrows the respondent to a single answer, and the fallacy of many questions has been committed.[2] The fallacy relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a question presupposes something does not in itself make the question fallacious. Only when some of these presuppositions are not necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question does the argument containing them become fallacious.[2] Hence the same question may be loaded in one context, but not in the other. For example the previous question would not be loaded if it was asked during a trial in which the defendant has already admitted to beating his wife.[2]
I bet you felt clever when you wrote that OP.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
235 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"I was raised to treat religion as a private matter." Too bad most religionists don't follow that...
PoutrageFatigue
May 2015
#171
Well he can speak to his own op and believers here have their moments, but...
hrmjustin
May 2015
#87
I don't click on threads bashing animal rights activists for a reason.
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#99
I don't think so. That is why I don't use terms you don't like to refer to you or others
LostOne4Ever
May 2015
#142
No one here is anti-lgbt and we fight against it in our places of worship and communities.
hrmjustin
May 2015
#23
No. They have the right to their opinions but their opinions are not ok with me.
hrmjustin
May 2015
#49
I did. That hate is protected speech. So it's "ok". Are you "ok" with the First Amendment?
rug
May 2015
#34
No what you are doing is acting like a prosecutor and we are not your accused.
hrmjustin
May 2015
#151
It is pointless to bother because when you answer a question you are told you didn't and
hrmjustin
May 2015
#201
No i gave up because you were telling me that I didn't answer a question when I did.
hrmjustin
May 2015
#213
Disingenuous nonsense and insulting people's intelligence are also not signs of respect
skepticscott
May 2015
#46
But how can one respect a belief that ensures another feels terror brought on by someone
AuntPatsy
May 2015
#44
Some people have zero interest in fostering understanding and furthering conversation,
cbayer
May 2015
#194
Trouble is, your point has already been addressed. More times than I care to count.
Act_of_Reparation
May 2015
#200
Well if you're running a contest for rude statements, I provided the winner's posts above.
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#219
Homophobes who compare ssm to bestiality and call people "vermin" shouldn't criticize anyone
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#218
Some believers here on DU, including a host of the interfaith forum, have attempted to conflate
AtheistCrusader
May 2015
#65
I sincerely hope you don't need clarification, since you were the first poster to respond to his
AtheistCrusader
May 2015
#67