# No, it DOESN'T "beg the question"! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 16, 2003, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942 "2003-07-16T18:23:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Scarlett67](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scarlett67/32/7387_2.png) [@Scarlett67](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarlett67)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/1 "2003-07-16T18:23:06Z")
Aargh!! I think I’ve seen this misuse three times today. Let’s get it straight, people: **“Begging the question” is NOT the same as “raising the question.”** To beg the question is a term in logic that refers to the error of assuming the truth of what you are trying to prove (as in “Parallel lines never meet because they are parallel”). It is a translation from the Latin _petitio principii_. So stop writing crap like “Roses are red. So this begs the question: Are violets blue?” And all you descriptivists who say that language evolves and this will soon be a proper usage can all bite me. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/2 "2003-07-16T18:41:26Z")
Which begs the question: What does **Scarlett** taste like? ---
**Author:** ![Mearl\_Dox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@Mearl\_Dox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mearl_Dox)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/3 "2003-07-16T19:02:09Z")
I’ve noticed that most of the people who use ‘beg the question’ incorrectly are trying to sound smarter than they are to prove some sort of silly point. And they often do, in fact, beg the question. Just not in the way they think. ---
**Author:** ![Kamandi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5daacb/32.png) [@Kamandi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kamandi)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/4 "2003-07-16T19:09:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scarlett67 \* > \*\*(as in “Parallel lines never meet because they are parallel”) \*\* Isn’t that a “tautology”? ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/5 "2003-07-16T19:16:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kamandi \* > \*\*Isn’t that a “tautology”? \*\* I think that’s more of an axiom. It is assumed to be true but isn’t proven. Euclidean geometry is challenged on the basis of this axiom and various non-Euclidean geometries are based on the falsity of this phrase. A tautology is more like a=a. The “truth” of the statement is, in effect, meaningless in that it doesn’t carry in new information. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/6 "2003-07-16T19:47:46Z")
Irregardless, it’s unneccessarily redundant. ---
**Author:** ![LauraLittlePony](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@LauraLittlePony](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LauraLittlePony)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/7 "2003-07-16T20:09:33Z")
I’ll add that to my list of annoying things I’ve been meaning to stop doing for a long time. Dammit! There are always some I forget. . . ---
**Author:** ![kingpengvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9dc877/32.png) [@kingpengvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kingpengvin)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/8 "2003-07-16T20:12:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by blowero \* > \*\*Irregardless, it’s unneccessarily redundant. \*\* hee hee. Now that was funny. You have to wonder what the English language will be like in a few generations. I’m learning to speak French because if English is going to evolve this way just because some people are tools who wish to sound smart, I want nothing to do with it… ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/9 "2003-07-16T20:27:39Z")
Yay. I’m not the only one who finds this annoying. From Bryan Garner’s _A Dictionary of Modern American Usage_: > [@](#): > > The proper meaning of _begging the question_ is “basing a conclusion on an assumption that is as much in need of proof or demonstration as the conclusion itself.” The formal name for this logical fallacy is _petitio principii_. His clearest example is: “Life begins at conception, which is defined as the beginning of life.” ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/10 "2003-07-16T20:55:28Z")
Tautology: A or Not A Contradiction: A and Not A (A tautology is implied by anything, and a contradiction implies anything.) ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/11 "2003-07-16T22:15:19Z")
I tried begging questions, but man are they tightwads. Nothing but “Get a job, you lousy bum.” You’ve much better off begging statements. What? Someone was going to say it eventually. ---
**Author:** ![Svt4Him](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@Svt4Him](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Svt4Him)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/12 "2003-07-16T22:22:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kingpengvin \* > \*\*hee hee. Now that was funny. > > You have to wonder what the English language will be like in a few generations. \*\* 1+ wILl L00k @ LoT l1K3 +hI5. F4IRly 34$Y +O uND3r$TANd 0NcE j00 9E+ +3h h4ng opH 1+, 4L+HoU9H Pr0848lY n0t W0rtH GetTIn9 tH3 hAn9 Of, IMH0. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/13 "2003-07-16T22:28:53Z")
I think it is high time some sticks were pulled from asses (including my own, as I have picked people up on this myself). Who the fucking hell are we to tell people that they **can’t** use a certain arrangement of words to mean exactly what it appears to mean, just because it also happens to be the archaic name of a logical fallacy? ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/14 "2003-07-16T22:32:17Z")
Because **Mangetout** , people who think they know everything are annoying to those of us who do. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/15 "2003-07-16T23:04:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > Tautology: A or Not A > > … > > (A tautology is implied by anything… No, a tautology is a repetition (e.g. a contradictory oxymoron), or something which is necessarily true (e.g. no parallel lines ever meet) ---
**Author:** ![Freiheit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e8c25b/32.png) [@Freiheit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freiheit)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/16 "2003-07-16T23:04:47Z")
Thank you, Scarlett. I see that term misused so much. The misuse is actually becoming a CLICHE! ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/17 "2003-07-16T23:05:16Z")
Sorry, a circular argument is a special case of the begged question. the general begged question is one in which **the assumption is _at least as_ questionable as the conclusion**. Obviously, in a circular argument, the conclusion and the assumption are the same, so they will indeed qualify under the “at least as questionable as” criterion. You are right, though, that “raise the question” is not always an acceptable substitute. It is appropriate so long as the question raised is one about the assumptions necessary to drive the conclusion. [link](http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#begging) > [@](#): > > This fallacy occurs when the premises are at least as questionable as the conclusion reached. Typically the premises of the argument implicitly assume the result which the argument purports to prove, in a disguised form. ---
**Author:** ![jackelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a6a055/32.png) [@jackelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackelope)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/18 "2003-07-16T23:34:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mangetout \* > \*\*I think it is high time some sticks were pulled from asses (including my own, as I have picked people up on this myself). > > Who the fucking hell are we to tell people that they **can’t** use a certain arrangement of words to mean exactly what it appears to mean, just because it also happens to be the archaic name of a logical fallacy? \*\* Flugelhorn defenestrate lipid skybox (mongrel) meliorate Saturn; flammable. (I use that particular arrangement of words to mean "We have accepted conventions as to what words mean, and if a precisely defined group of words like _beg the question_, for which we have no convenient and generally accepted alternative, gets co-opted to mean “raise the question,” then that is one less useful concept people will have in their vocabularies. It is much like the pervasive and infuriating misuse of _irony_ to mean “anything noteworthy in any way.”) ---
**Author:** ![Ben\_Hicks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bbce88/32.png) [@Ben\_Hicks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben_Hicks)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/19 "2003-07-16T23:44:37Z")
The funny thing is that the “incorrect” usage is far more logical and commonsensical than the “correct” usage. If you had never heard the term “begging the question” before and had no idea of its meaning would you think that it meant to _invite_ a question (in other words, to draw a conclusion which invites an assumption which needs to be questioned such as “The Smashing Pumpkins kick ass because the Mellan Collie album contains so many great tracks”, a conclusion which “begs” the question “What’s so great about the tracks on that particular album?”) or would you think it meant “to assume the conclusion one is attempting to prove?” Honestly, which do you think the term “Begging the question” is more suggestive of? The term “begging the question” is archaic and is generally longer used to signify what it used to. The term has evolved to describe a wholly different logical fallacy, that of simply making unwarrented assumptions/presumptions. The logical fallacy of ‘assuming the conclusion one is attempting to prove’ needs to be given a new name. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2003, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942/20 "2003-07-16T23:49:45Z")
I’d be nearer to being swayed if it didn’t need so much explanation as to why the term is _so appropriate_ in describing the logical fallacy. ‘beg’ and ‘raise’ hardly mean or imply the same thing anyway, so I reject the suggestion that the need is entirely met by the phrase “raises the question”. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-it-doesnt-beg-the-question/188942.md?page=2)