Enthymeme: Logical reasoning in which one premise is left unspoken; instead of an irrefutable universal fact for the primary premise, it is an assumption, assertion, or proposition that the writer assumes and the listener accepts. For example, John is powerful because he is a guy. John the Baptist was born as a man. Therefore, John can't be powerful as a baby.
Enthymemes are logical arguments in which one premise is left unspoken. These arguments can be used by politicians to convince their audiences that their actions are justified. For example, President Franklin D. Roosevelt could not bring himself to send American soldiers to fight against Germany in World War II. So, he made a rhetorical enthymeme: "I have heard many people say 'Why should we go into Asia? The Japanese did not attack us.' This argument is based on a false analogy. Japan is a country with a government, whereas Germany is a nation without a government. Thus, this argument is invalid."
Roosevelt was trying to justify his decision by citing examples from other countries that had been attacked by Germany. This was known as "diplomatic persuasion". Diplomats use enthymemes when arguing about issues before political bodies such as legislatures or councils. For example, when presenting evidence to a jury, lawyers often omit certain facts that would lead to reasonable doubt. This is done to make their cases more persuasive.
An enthymeme is an argument that lacks either a premise or a conclusion. An "enthymeme" is an argument that lacks a premise, a conclusion, or both. Some of the exclamatory statements are correct. However an enthymeme cannot be missing both premises.
An enthymeme (pronounced EN-thuh-meem) is a type of syllogism or logical reasoning in which one of the premises is left unsaid. A syllogism is a logical conclusion based on two premises. The traditional example is as follows: all men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
In logic teaching, the term "enthymeme" is used to describe a type of argument in which only one premise is stated explicitly and the other one is implied rather than stated outright. This can be useful in arguments that involve assumptions or beliefs about what was not said. For example, if I were to ask you why New York City is called the city of dreams, you might say because it's a dream destination for so many people. But this implies that you believe there is something about New York City that makes it a good place to visit in your sleep. To put it another way, you are using an enthymeme when you argue by implication.
The enthymeme is a very common device in rhetoric and political discourse. For example, when politicians claim that they want to improve education in this country, they are often saying that we need to invest more in our schools. But they do not have to spell out the connection between investing in education and winning some votes from Americans who may not think much of our public schools.
The philosopher Aristotle defined an enthymeme as a form of syllogism. Enthymeme now follows the same rationale as However, one premise is concealed or inferred but not stated. In an enthymeme, you only have one premise and one conclusion. This means that every line of the enthymeme leads to either the conclusion or another line of reasoning that concludes with the same sentence fragment as the original line.
Here are some examples of enthymemes: "Socrates is a man; men are mortal; therefore Socrates must die." "Soldiers fight for their countries; Peter is a soldier; therefore Peter must fight for his country." "Scientists study plants and animals; Pablo is a scientist; therefore Pablo must study plants and animals."
An example of a syllogism is as follows: "All soldiers are human; Peter is a soldier; therefore Peter is human." Both enthymemes and syllepses can be used in arguments, but only enthymemes contain only two lines of reasoning.
Ethymemes were first described by Aristotle. They are found in many cultures around the world and over time they have been used by philosophers to show how one idea can be derived from another without stating exactly how this connection is done.
The Unspoken Premise An enthymeme is a syllogism in which one of the premises is suggested rather than stated. Enthymemes can be found in literature, film, and even talks. Learn more about logic and logical fallacies by looking at the different types of logical fallacies. Logical fallacies include: abuse of logic, appeal to emotion, argument from authority, argumentum ad populum, and begging the question.
In American English, enthymeme logic ('enthI, mim) is a syllogism in which one of the premises or the conclusion is not explicitly stated but is inferred. For example, "All mammals are alive; Socrates is a mammal; therefore, Socrates is alive." In traditional Aristotelian logic, only the major premise is implied by the definition of a term (in this case, all mammals are living things), while the minor premise (Socrates is a mammal) would have to be established independently.
In modern usage, the word "enthymeme" has come to mean any logical argument in which one or more of the propositions involved is tacitly assumed rather than expressed in words. Thus, an enthymeme justifying slavery was commonly used by Southern politicians during the U.S. Civil War, since it did not require them to admit that slavery was wrong. The word has also been applied to similar forms of reasoning in other contexts, such as police interrogation techniques that do not use the word "proof", but instead imply the suspect's guilt due to their knowledge that he has done something wrong.
Etymology: Greek enthymeme, inference; process of inferring
An "enthymeme" is an argumentation statement in which the writer or speaker omits one of the major or minor premises, does not properly articulate it, or leaves it inferred. The missing premise of an enthymeme, on the other hand, is comprehensible even if it is not explicitly stated. Thus, an enthymeme can be used to make a point while avoiding explicit argumentation.
Enthymemes can be identified by reading between the lines and making assumptions based on context, but they can also be identified directly by analyzing arguments to see if they contain any of the following: missing information, incorrect information, or irrelevant information.
Missing information occurs when a premise that would normally be included is omitted from the argument. For example, in the above argument against euthanasia, the first premise, which states that every human being has a right to life, is missing. Even though the author of the argument appears to assume this fact as true, it must be inferred from the rest of the sentence.
Incorrect information occurs when a premise that is written or spoken correctly in itself becomes incorrect through application to the current situation. For example, in the above argument against euthanasia, the second premise, which states that suffering humans should not be put out of their pain, is incorrect because it assumes that all pain is harmful rather than some kinds of pain being harmless or even beneficial.