Re: Wikipedia trashes the Tautology article.

On 17 Apr, 12:14, backspace <Stephan...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Neither is Begging the question a tautology.
Sure is. Begging the question is of the form A because of A

Dr. Wilkins has stated that a tautology is not the same thing as
circular reasoning.

And they aren't. Every circular argument is a tautology, not every
tautology is a circular argument

Tautologies and Truisms are used together as a rhetorical device in a
deceptive attempt to argue for a view if it isn't possible to
independently establish the real reason for the viewpoint elsewhere.
The seeming complexity of such an argument might comes across as well
reasoned but is really just the articulation of a world view that
can't be Falsified. Rhetorical tautologies are a synonymous play with
words that alludes to the same fact but in doing so presents itself as
an explanation giving the illusion of uncovering the actual reason for
the observation. An example of this word play would be the following
tautological proposition: favorable traits become more common and
unfavorable traits become less common. The word favorable and the term
more common are a synonymous play on words
"Favourable" and "more common" are most certainly not synonymous in
English:

Agreed, they are not but they synonymously allude to the same fact.

I don't think that sentence makes sentence, or that "synonymously
alludes to" is a meaningful expression. And even if one could
reconstruct some meaning, "favourable" and "more common" would not
fall under it, they describe entirely different things. Sometimes,
given the right conditions, something that is more favourable can
become contingently also more common, often it doesn't

One can use different phrases that essentially says the same thing,
the is issue is what is your concept, pragmatics, intent. The words
are the semantics that encodes your concept for me to decode.

Such as Non-Random which Wikipedia calls a "non-probability sample" as
opposed to a "random sample" which again depends on the contexts the
terms are used.
Evolutionists are deluded in thinking that can redefine the semantic
meaning of "non-random" to no longer be a synonym for "directed" at
the semantic level.

A delusion shared by them with mathematicians, statisticians,
computer scientists - well, frankly anyone who actually works in the
field.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Evolution confuses an observation with a theory
    ... simply restates one word in terms of another, it is a circular ... "survival of the fittest" is a verbal shorthand for complex ... The *math* is not a tautology - for the terms in the equations are ... All I am noted for is bad puns. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Op-Ed: Beyond the fish wars
    ... I thought that a tautology would be something like, ... ID posits that life is too complex to ... >definiandum is the definiens (i.e., the left hand side of the definition is ... Formaly, of course, that is a circular argument. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Hulls sentence doesnt seem to refer to Darwinian
    ... Phrases are neither true nor ... is not a tautology, but a false statement; ... Circular reasoning is a distinct concept separate from a tautology. ... see this by looking at all the models where everybody survives, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Robot Evolution
    ... If mathematics remains just a tautology (a circular argument based on ... remain deducible from the predicate) remains impossible. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: What is the concept of fitness ?
    ... Tautologies are *true.* So if evolution is a tautology, ... a typical head of hair has around 150,000 hairs. ... the question is why did they become more common. ... the ToE is on change over time, not the exact degree of "favorability" ...
    (talk.origins)