Begging the question (or petitio principii, "assuming the initial point") is a type of logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premise.
The first known definition in the West is by Aristotle around 350 BCE, in his book Prior Analytics, where he classified it as a material fallacy...
The term was translated into English from Latin in the 16th century. The Latin version, petitio principii, can be interpreted in different ways. Petitio (from peto), in the post-classical context in which the phrase arose, means "assuming" or "postulating," but in the older classical sense means "petition," "request," or "beseeching." Principii, genitive of principium, means "beginning," "basis," or "premise" (of an argument). Literally petitio principii means "assuming the premise" or "assuming the original point," or, alternately, "a request for the beginning or premise;" that is, the premise depends on the truth of the very matter in question...
Thomas Fowler believed that Petitio Principii would be more properly called Petitio Quæsiti, which is literally "begging the question".
The fallacy of petitio principii, or "begging the question", is committed "when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof", or more generally denotes when an assumption is used, "in some form of the very proposition to be proved, as a premise from which to deduce it". Thus, insofar as petitio principii refers to arguing for a conclusion that has already been assumed in the premise, this fallacy consists of "begging" the listener to accept the "question" (proposition) before the labor of logic is undertaken. The fallacy may be committed in various ways. When the fallacy of begging the question is committed in a single step, it is sometimes called a hysteron proteron, as in the statement "Opium induces sleep because it has a soporific quality." Such fallacies may not be immediately obvious due to the use of synonyms or synonymous phrases; one way to beg the question is to make a statement first in concrete terms, then in abstract ones, or vice-versa. Another is to "bring forth a proposition expressed in words of Saxon origin, and give as a reason for it the very same proposition stated in words of Norman origin," as in this example: "To allow every man an unbounded freedom of speech must always be, on the whole, advantageous to the State, for it is highly conducive to the interests of the community that each individual should enjoy a liberty perfectly unlimited of expressing his sentiments"...
"Begging the question" can also refer to making an argument in which the premise "is different from the conclusion ... but is controversial or questionable for the same reasons that typically might lead someone to question the conclusion."
"....seldom is anyone going to simply place the conclusion word-for- word into the premises .... Rather, an arguer might use phraseology that conceals the fact that the conclusion is masquerading as a premise. The conclusion is rephrased to look different and is then placed in the premises." —Paul Herrick
...Many English speakers use "begs the question" to mean "raises the question," or "impels the question," and follow that phrase with the question raised, for example, "this year's deficit is half a trillion dollars, which begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" Many philosophers and grammarians deem such usage incorrect. Academic linguist Mark Liberman recommends avoiding the phrase entirely, noting that because of shifts in usage in both Latin and English over the centuries, the relationship of the literal expression to its intended meaning is unintelligible and therefore it is now "such a confusing way to say it that only a few pedants understand the phrase."
On Mar 14, 2012, at 4:13 PM, Marv Gandall wrote:
> On 2012-03-14, at 3:41 PM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 14, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Marv Gandall wrote:
>>
>>>> [WS:] This begs the question whether...