Abstract
This is a critical appreciation of Govier's 2006 ISSA keynote address on the fallacy of composition, and of economists' writings on this fallacy in economics. I argue that the "fallacy of composition" is a problematical concept, because it does not denote a distinctive kind of argument but rather a plurality, and does not constitute a distinctive kind of error, but rather reduces to oversimplification in arguing from micro to macro. Finally, I propose further testing of this claim based on examples involving public vs. private debt in economics; oligarchic tendencies in politics, and the emergence of societal wholes in sociology. © Maurice Finocchiaro.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Finocchiaro, M. A. (2013). Debts, oligarchies, and holisms: Deconstructing the fallacy of composition. Informal Logic, 33(2 SPL.ISSUE), 143–174. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v33i2.3892
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.