RTanker
Since: Oct, 2010
Nov 14th 2011 at 2:21:54 PM
•••
Cut this:
- In Much Ado About Nothing, this exchange between Benedick and Beatrice:
Beatrice: And yet, ere I go, let me go with that I came; which is, with knowing what hath passed between you and Claudio.
Benedick: Only foul words; and thereupon I will kiss thee.
Beatrice: Foul words is but foul wind, and foul wind is but foul breath, and foul breath is noisome; therefore I will depart unkissed.
Jordan
Since: Jan, 2001
Nov 14th 2011 at 3:42:03 PM
•••
I think it would count. I mean in the Touchstone example, it's not like he was making a logical fallacy either- granted, he was tricking someone, but in both instances, the character is using the fallacy for rhetorical effect, but it's still a use of the fallacy.
Hodor
This trope page is confused.
It's describing a special case of fallacies of equivocation, which involve changing definitions.
The page quote is not a fallacy of equivocation. It's actually a perfect example of the formal fallacy of affirming the consequent. You can't reverse implications or treat them like biconditions. A implying B does not mean B implies A, hence why the syllogisms from Colbert lead to the comical conclusion that Stevie Wonder is God.