The “Breda Fallacy” is still a mystery

Amusingly enough, wordpress generated a link to the post Logical Fallacies — the Non Sequitur. This seemed appropriate to me as the name “Breda Fallacy” is turning out to be a bit of a non-sequitur:

This term is often applied in a general sense to any sort of logical fallacy, more specifically referring to any chain of reasoning and argumentation where the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premises, or any argument where a logical connection between premises is implied that just ain’t there.

Thank you, Troythulu!

I have to admit that a relationship of this to the Sieges of Breda is an intriguing possibility. In fact, the connection to Breda in the Netherlands is something which has me very intrigued.

No joy on searches of “Breda logisch denkfout” and “Breda retorisch denkfout”.

A possible explanation has come up:

In logic and rhetoric, a fallacy is a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning in argumentation.

Basically, there are many kinds of fallacies. BUT…THIS one stuck out most:

Accident (fallacy): when an exception to the generalization is ignored.

There you have it. I don’t want to…nor do I try to…fit in the same group everyone else that looks like me has been thrown in….and at times, I feel like I get ignored for it.

Personally, I am still looking for an esoteric logical or rhetorical device called the Breda Fallacy.

It would be nice to have a helpful reference librarian, but I am having fun trying to suss this one for myself.

BTW, no word from my friends in Breda.

%d bloggers like this: