Argument: “He said to himself that she had gone safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms that it was idle to suppose she would not come safely home from this trip also”
Standard form
- She (the ship) went safely through many voyages
- She (the ship) weathered many storms
- She (the ship) will return safely from the next trip
This is not a valid argument because the premises can be false. It says that it weathered “many” storms which leaves room for error and it is not certain that the boat will return safely.
1) All beliefs influence action in some way or another.
2) Actions based on unjustified beliefs either cause harm directly, or they promote credulity which results in broad social ills.
C) Therefore it is always wrong to hold unjustified beliefs
I’m also lead to believe that this argument is not sound. The conclusion is a prediction based off of a prediction and not fact. Many times she weathered the storm but that does not guarantee she will be safe to make the trip again.
This may not be a practical claim because it doesn’t take into consideration the damage that was done to her (the ship) as it “weathered many storms”. This could be evidence that she (the ship) may not be safe to sail again. It could be because of the many voyages that the boat encountered that it is now damaged.
The fallacy that I see here is an Appeal to Past Practice. Where they are playing off of a pattern that occurred in the past and not the current condition of the ship. Although the ship has gone through many voyages, how does that make it equip to set sail again? I wasn’t taken into account the damage that has been done.
Another fallacy I see here Is Oversimplification when the ideology of safe travels on a ship are more complicated than just past predictions. Ship safety involves checking for fuel and life jackets not merely noticing trips that were made in the past.
(Word count: 343)
Rhythmically Unique 