Retortion: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:: ''Si fallor, sum.'' | :: ''Si fallor, sum.'' | ||
:; Descartes | |||
:: ''Cogito, ergo sum.'' | |||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
Line 15: | Line 19: | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
--> | --> | ||
== Links == | == Links == | ||
* Moleski: | * Moleski: |
Revision as of 17:15, 18 April 2018
Retortion is the act of identifying a self-referential contradiction in an opponent's position.
So, for example, if I were to write, "No one can type a coherent sentence in English," a thoughtful critic might retort: "But what you just wrote provides evidence against what you claim to be true."
Retortion is spelled "retorsion" in French. The idea of turning an opponent's self-referential contradictions into a reason for rejecting the position is common among Transcendental Thomists, who used various forms of this argument to demonstrate the instability of Kant's epistemology.
Classical examples
- St. Augustine, De Trinitate, 12-21; De Civitate Dei, XI, 26
- Si fallor, sum.
- Descartes
- Cogito, ergo sum.
Links
- Moleski: