====== Amphiboly ======

Refers to an ambiguous statement that is caused by an ambiguity in the grammatical structure.

For example:

> “<u questionable "Ambiguous">Police shot dead man armed with knife.</u>”

This phrase can be interpreted in multiple ways, making it very hard to understand what actually happened here.

===== Other names =====

  * Semantic Ambiguity
  * Ambiguity fallacy
  * Amphibology

===== Description =====

//Amphiboly// is a form of [[glossary:equivocation:index|equivocation]] and is often considered the equivalent to [[glossary:equivocation:prosody|prosody]], whereas the latter is more narrowly defined (every //prosody// is an //amphiboly//, but not every //amphiboly// is a //prosody//).

In practice, //amphiboles// that are //not// also //prosodies// are rare and the distinction is of little practical value. For more information, see the articles on [[glossary:equivocation:prosody|prosody]] and [[glossary:equivocation:index|equivocation]].

===== Examples =====
==== Generic generalizations ====

There is a  whole class of amphibolies that take the form "𝑋 do/are 𝑌 ". These are superficially similar to logical [[glossary:categorical_statement|categorical propositions]], but lack the required [[glossary:quantifier|quantifier]], so it remains unclear whether these statements refer to [[glossary:universal_quantification|all]] or only [[glossary/existential_quantification|some]] elements of the [[glossary:extension|extension]].

This kind of statement is quite prevalent in political and social discourse – surely everyone has heard or read statements such as the following:
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">The English are tea drinkers.</u>
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">The Dutch are bad drivers.</u>
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">Politicians are corrupt.</u>
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">Women are irrational.</u>
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">Men are rapists.</u>
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">Sicilians are mafiosi.</u>
  * <u questionable "ambiguous statement">Muslims are terrorists.</u>
  * etc.

The appeal of such ambiguous statements is that one can always choose the most appropriate interpretation in any given situation. This makes it possible to make provocative and possibly even discriminatory statements – and then easily talk yourself out of ostensibly having been “misunderstood”.

More on this in the article on <span maniculus "for more information, please see:">[[ambiguity:syntactic:generic_generalization|generic generalisation]]</span>.

===== See also =====

  * [[glossary:equivocation:index|Equivocation]]
  * [[ambiguity:syntactic:generic_generalization|Generic generalisation]]
  * [[ambiguity:syntactic:index|Syntactic ambiguity]]

===== More information =====

  * [[wp>Amphiboly]] on //Wikipedia//
  * [[https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/17/Ambiguity-Fallacy|Ambiguity Fallacy]] on //Logically Fallacious//
  * [[https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_amphiboly|Fallacy of amphiboly]] on //RationalWiki//

{{page>templates:banner#Short-BG-Rhetoric&noheader&nofooter}}