Page:Carroll - Game of Logic.djvu/50

But mind, you mustn't say "Fallacious Conclusion," simply because it is not identical with the correct one: it may be a part of the correct Conclusion, and so be quite correct, as far as it goes. In this case you would merely remark, with a pitying smile, "Defective Conclusion!" Suppose, for example, you were to meet with this Syllogism:—

"All unselfish people are generous;	$\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,}$
No misers are generous.
∴ No misers are unselfish."

the Premisses of which might be thus expressed in letters:—

"All $x^{\prime }$ are $m$;	$\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,}$
No $y$ are $m$."

Here the correct Conclusion would be "All $x^{\prime }$ are $y^{\prime }$" (that is, "All unselfish people are not misers"), while the Conclusion, drawn by the writer, is "No $y$ are $x^{\prime }$" (which is the same as "No $x^{\prime }$ are $y$" and so is part of "All $x^{\prime }$ are $y^{\prime }$."} Here you would simply say "Defective Conclusion!" The same thing would happen, if you were in a confectioner's shop, and if a little boy were to come in, put down twopence, and march off triumphantly with a single penny-bun. You would shake your head mournfully, and would remark "Defective Conclusion! Poor little chap!" And perhaps you would ask the young lady behind the counter whether she would let you eat the bun, which the little boy had paid for and left behind him: and perhaps she would reply "Sha'n't!"