# Is there a name for this type of logical fallacy (seal = fuck?) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 15, 2007, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073 "2007-12-15T04:03:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/1 "2007-12-15T04:03:37Z")
When I was in 4th grade in French class, we learned that “foque” was French for “seal” (as in the animal." Our little 4th grade minds figured that since that word was so close to the sound of “fuck,” that if we said “SEAL!” to a French person, he would interpret that as “fuck.” In other words, “‘seal’ is how you say ‘fuck’ in French! Heh heh heh!” Of course, the logic of this is totally flawed. But it is flawed in such a way that makes me think there might even be a name for the type of fallacy it represents. Is there? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/2 "2007-12-15T08:54:41Z")
It’s just a non sequitur. ---
**Author:** ![Bootis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bootis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bootis)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/3 "2007-12-15T09:30:59Z")
It sounds like a type of converting a conditional (a --\> b, therefore b --\>a) ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/4 "2007-12-15T10:18:46Z")
Yeah, actually I agree with Bootis. It’s like a conditional affirmation of the consequent. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/5 "2007-12-15T11:16:27Z")
Back home we call this pushing the string. Or turning the crack backwards on the meat grinder. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/6 "2007-12-15T11:43:48Z")
Sounds like a variation on [Cockney rhyming slang](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockney_rhyming_slang): > [@](#): > > Porkies = pork pies = lies > Apples = apples and pears = stairs > Barnet = Barnet Fair = hair > Brass = Brass Flute = Prostitute > Dog = dog and bone = telephone > Jam = Jam jar = Car > Water = Water bottle = throttle > China = China plate = mate > Frog = frog and toad = road > Rosie = Rosie Lee = tea/gypsy > J. Arthur = J. Arthur Rank = wank (masturbate) > Trouble = trouble and strife = wife ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/7 "2007-12-15T12:14:12Z")
[False friends](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_friend) ---
**Author:** ![jovan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/0ea827/32.png) [@jovan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jovan)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/8 "2007-12-15T13:15:48Z")
[QUOTE=Peter Morris] [False friends](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_friend) [/QUOTE] That’s not really what a false friend is, though. For instance, in French, if you want to draw a circle, you use a _compas_. However, if you you’re looking for a direction you use a _boussole_. And, by the way, it’s _phoque_, not _foque_… Which reminds me of a skit by a Quebec comedian: (As a French journalist reporting on seal hunting.) > [@](#): > > Over here, hunters brutally kill baby seals to make cotton. It true. Every local I asked confirmed the story: > _Ouate de phoque_. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/9 "2007-12-15T15:03:10Z")
[QUOTE=jovan] That’s not really what a false friend is, though. [/quote] Isn’t it? why not? From Wiki: - False friends (or faux amis) are pairs of words in two languages or dialects (or letters in two alphabets) that look and/or sound similar, but differ in meaning … Another example is the word ‘gift’, which in English means ‘present’ but in German means ‘poison’. \* Isn’t that what the OP is asking about? > [@](#): > > For instance, in French, if you want to draw a circle, you use a _compas_. However, if you you’re looking for a direction you use a _boussole_. I don’t follow your point. I’d guess that \*compass \*and \*compas \*both derive from the same root. If I’m right then the example is irrelevent to the question. If that guess is wrong, then they would be false cognates, not false friends. False cognates are words in 2 different languages that sound similar, and have similar meanings, but derive from completely different roots. Example: English \*boy \*and Japanese _boya_ both mean young male child, but they have no common origin. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/10 "2007-12-15T15:16:55Z")
> [@](#): > > Isn’t it? why not? The OP does describe a pair of “false friends,” yes. But his question is: because “foque” was French for “seal” we assumed “seal” was French for “foque.” That is a fallacious conclusion. Is there a name for the fallacy? Yes. It’s called [Affirming the Consequent.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_Consequent) ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/11 "2007-12-15T17:24:24Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] It’s called [Affirming the Consequent.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_Consequent) [/QUOTE] Close, but not quite. That fallacy constitutes a malformed modus tollens. A -\> B. B :: A. Since there is no truth value assignment in the OP’s example, Bootis is right that it’s a converted conditional, which is always a fallacy unless the terms are biconditional. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/12 "2007-12-15T17:56:59Z")
Mathematically, the fallacy is assuming the situation is A=B and therefore B=A. But the real situation is f(A)=B which does not necessarily mean f(B)=A ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/13 "2007-12-15T18:30:46Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] Mathematically, the fallacy is assuming the situation is A=B and therefore B=A. [/QUOTE] Which would be equivalent to A \<-\> B. In that case, B -\> A would be true. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2007, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/14 "2007-12-15T22:12:14Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] But his question is: because “foque” was French for “seal” we assumed “seal” was French for “foque.” [/QUOTE] Ah, yes, I see. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2007, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/15 "2007-12-16T04:56:28Z")
> [@](#): > > Which would be equivalent to A \<-\> B. In that case, B -\> A would be true. But B -\> A is not true. Which is why it’s a fallacy to make this assumption. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2007, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/16 "2007-12-16T09:34:44Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] But B -\> A is not true. Which is why it’s a fallacy to make this assumption. [/QUOTE] Please read the post (again if necessary). B -\> A is true if A \<-\> B is true. That’s a biconditional implication. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2007, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-name-for-this-type-of-logical-fallacy-seal-fuck/430073/17 "2007-12-16T19:44:34Z")
Aw, seal all you logic monkeys! 😉