Secundum quid (also called secundum quid et simpliciter, meaning " in a certain respect and absolutely") is a type of informal fallacy that occurs when the arguer fails to recognize the difference between rules of thumb (soft generalizations, heuristics that hold true as a general rule but leave room for exceptions) and categorical propositions, rules that hold true universally.
Since it ignores the limits, or qualifications, of rules of thumb, this fallacy is also named ignoring qualifications or sweeping generalizations. The expression misuse of a principle can be used as well.
Example
Let me tell you: all great composers die young. Take Mendelssohn: he was 38. Or Mozart, just 35. And Schubert! Hundreds of songs, and he was only 31.
The arguer cites only the cases that support his point, conveniently omitting Bach, Beethoven, Brahms etc
In popular culture
The following quatrain can be attributed to C. H. Talbot:
I talked in terms whose sense was hid,
Dividendo, componendo et secundum quid;
Now secundum quid is a wise remark
And it earned my reputation as a learned clerk.
Types
 | This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (October 2014) |
Instances of secundum quid are of two kinds:
- Accident — a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid (where an acceptable exception is ignored) . This is taking the usual case and inappropriately applying it to special cases.
- Converse accident — a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter (where an acceptable exception is eliminated or simplified) . This is taking one unusual case and inappropriately applying it to all cases.
See also
References
- Damer, T. Edward (2009), Attacking Faulty Reasoning (6th ed.), Wadsworth, p. 148, ISBN 978-0-495-09506-4
Further reading
- Dowden, Bradley (2010). "Fallacies § Secundum quid". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- Bunnin, Nicholas; Yu, Jiyuan (2008). "Fallacy of secundum quid". The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. John Wiley & Sons. p. 250. ISBN 978-0-470-99721-5.
- Coffey, Peter (1912). The Science of Logic. Longmans, Green, and Company. p. 309. OL 7104938M.
- Joseph, H. W. B. (1916). "The fallacy of Secundum Quid". An Introduction to Logic (2nd ed.). Clarendon Press. p. 589. OCLC 373124.
- Parry, William T.; Hacker, Edward A. (1991). "A brief history of the fallacies of accident and secundum quid". Aristotelian Logic. SUNY Press. p. 438. ISBN 978-0-7914-0690-8.
- Walton, Douglas (1990). "Ignoring Qualifications (Secundum Quid) as a Subfallacy of Hasty Generalization" (PDF). Logique et Analyse. 33 (129–130): 113–154. ISSN 2295-5836.
| Common fallacies (list) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formal |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Informal |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
