Loaded language: Difference between revisions
Created page with "'''Loaded language''' is a type of appeal to emotion. An example would be referring to high profits as "obscene profits." Henry Hazlitt points out that people used the..." |
Pestergaines (talk | contribs) +Cite |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Loaded language''' is a type of [[appeal to emotion]]. An example would be referring to high profits as "obscene profits." [[Henry Hazlitt]] points out that people used the word "profiteer" but not "wageer" or "losseer".<ref>{{cite book|url=http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/|title=Economics in One Lesson|author=Hazlitt, Henry|chapter=The Function of Profits}}</ref> | '''Loaded language''' is a type of [[appeal to emotion]]. An example would be referring to high profits as "obscene profits." [[Henry Hazlitt]] points out that people used the word "profiteer" but not "wageer" or "losseer".<ref>{{cite book|url=http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/|title=Economics in One Lesson|author=Hazlitt, Henry|chapter=The Function of Profits}}</ref> | ||
Accepting the use of loaded language is an implicit concession to the person's argument. For example, someone may ask, "Do you believe it is okay to [[murder]] an armed robber who forces his way into your home?" By replying "Yes," one agrees to a statement that murder is sometimes acceptable. A | Accepting the use of loaded language is an implicit concession to the person's argument. For example, someone may ask, "Do you believe it is okay to [[murder]] an armed robber who forces his way into your home?" By replying "Yes," one agrees to a statement that murder is sometimes acceptable. A different response would be: "I believe it is okay to ''kill'' such a person in those circumstances."{{Fact}} | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
[[Category: | ==Links== | ||
* {{wplink}} | |||
[[Category:Argumentation]] | |||
Latest revision as of 21:30, 14 January 2013
Loaded language is a type of appeal to emotion. An example would be referring to high profits as "obscene profits." Henry Hazlitt points out that people used the word "profiteer" but not "wageer" or "losseer".[1]
Accepting the use of loaded language is an implicit concession to the person's argument. For example, someone may ask, "Do you believe it is okay to murder an armed robber who forces his way into your home?" By replying "Yes," one agrees to a statement that murder is sometimes acceptable. A different response would be: "I believe it is okay to kill such a person in those circumstances."[citation needed]
References
- ↑ Hazlitt, Henry. "The Function of Profits". Economics in One Lesson. http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/.