The curious case of “begging the question”

     What is it to “beg the question” (BtQ)? Why, it is to “raise a question or point that has not been dealt with.” It is to “invite an obvious question” (Oxford New American Dictionary) 

     Obviously! 

     But it is not so obvious to me, oldster—and philosopher—that I am. The term “beg the question” has a traditional meaning of significant importance in the study of logic or reasoning—and, I would suggest, in critical thinking instruction generally. It is the meaning that I was taught when I went to university in the early 70s. 

     To beg the question in this sense is to commit a particular fallacy. More specifically, it is to do this: in the course of arguing for proposition P, one assumes—without realizing it—the truth of P. 

     Logically, that's a total train wreck. 

     BtQ is a surpassing fallacy, like arguing for the proposition that God exists by simply repeating “God exists.” 

     QED!

     Here’s a standard example of this fallacy. Suppose I argue for God’s existence as follows: 

Of course God exists! After all, the Bible speaks of God, and we can trust the Bible, since it is divinely inspired! 

      — I.e., we know that God exists because the Bible assumes God’s existence; and anything the Bible assumes is true since the Bible has been made truthful by God 

      — Which is to assume that God exists in one’s argument to establish the proposition that God exists. 

      Embarrassing! Absurd! Ridiculous!

     Begging the question is alternatively called “circular” reasoning, for its starting point and end point are, in a way, the same point: God exists; thus, God exists.

     Critical thinkers are taught to be on the lookout for this fallacy because people do commit it. So it is important. 

     But, nowadays, there is no easy way to refer to it. 

     Fifty years ago, among some significant subset of educated persons, one could declare that Jones is “begging the question” and be understood. One was saying that, logically speaking, Jones has messed up bigtime, for he is assuming the very thing he is supposed to be supporting or defending. Ridiculous!

     But, nowadays, unless one is among philosophers or logicians, one's remark about Jones will not be understood. —Without the old sense of "BtQ," one is compelled to scramble to make oneself understood.

* * * 

     Let’s turn to the Oxford English Dictionary, which provides the following entry for “beg the question”: 

     To take for granted without warrant; esp. in to beg the question: to take for granted the matter in dispute, to assume without proof. 

     1581 W. Charke in A. Nowell et al. True Rep. Disput. E. Campion (1584) iv. sig. F f iij I say this is still to begge the question. 

     1680 Bp. G. Burnet Some Passages Life Rochester (1692) 82 This was to assert or beg the thing in Question. 

     1687 E. Settle Refl. Dryden's Plays 13 Here hee's at his old way of Begging the meaning. 

     1788 T. Reid Aristotle's Logic v. §3. 118 Begging the question is when the thing to be proved is assumed in the premises. 

     1852 H. Rogers Eclipse of Faith (ed. 2) 251 Many say it is begging the point in dispute. 

     1870 F. C. Bowen Logic ix. 294 The vulgar equivalent for petitio principii is begging the question. 

     So the OED recognizes the traditional meaning but does not recognize the newer “raise the question” meaning. But most modern (and likely more up-to-date) dictionaries do recognize it, though they also recognize the traditional meaning. 

     In fact, one can find three meanings in contemporary dictionaries: 

• To assume precisely what one is supposed to be arguing for  (traditional)

• To raise or invite an obvious question (newfangled)

• To evade an issue (newfangled)

     The last meaning is mentioned only occasionally. It appears to be a creature that has crawled a few inches from the traditional meaning. 

     The New Oxford American Dictionary (which is loaded on all Apple computers) offers this usage note: 

     USAGE - The original meaning of the phrase beg the question belongs to the field of logic and is a translation of the Latin term petitio principii, literally meaning ‘laying claim to a principle’ (that is, assuming something that ought to be proved first), as in the following sentence: by devoting such a large part of the anti-drug budget to education, we are begging the question of its significance in the battle against drugs. To some traditionalists, this is still the only correct meaning. However, over the last 100 years or so, another, more general use has arisen: ‘invite an obvious question,’ as in some definitions of mental illness beg the question of what constitutes normal behavior. This is by far the more common use today in modern standard English. 

     So the NOAD holds that “some traditionalists,” including, evidently, the OED, regard what I’m calling the traditional meaning of BtQ as the only correct meaning. On the other hand, the NOAD is likely correct in saying that the “invite an obvious question” meaning “is by far the more common use today in modern standard English.” 

     The American Heritage Dictionary offers this usage note: 

     Historically, logicians and philosophers have used the phrase beg the question to mean "to put forward an argument whose conclusion is already assumed as a premise." Usually, when people beg the question in this sense, the conclusion and the assumed premise are put in slightly different words, which tends to obscure the fact that such an argument is logically meaningless. For instance, to argue that caviar tastes better than peanut butter because caviar has a superior flavor is to beg the question—the premise that is taken as given (that caviar's flavor is superior) is essentially identical to the point it is intended to prove (that caviar tastes better).· But since at least the early 1900s, laypeople have been using beg the question in slightly different senses, to mean "raise a relevant question" or "leave a relevant question unanswered." When used in these senses, beg the question is usually followed by a clause explaining what the question in question is, as in That article begs the question of whether we should build a new school or renovate the old one or The real estate listing claims that the kitchen is spacious, which begs the question of what "spacious" means. These senses of beg the question are so well established that they have nearly displaced the original sense in everyday usage, but they are still often frowned on by traditionalists, especially those with training in philosophy; in our 2013 survey, the sentences above were judged acceptable only by slim majorities of the Usage Panel—55 and 58 percent, respectively. By contrast, a sentence using the phrase in its original sense (When I asked him why we must protect every endangered species regardless of the cost, he said it was because every species is priceless, but that just begs the question) was considered acceptable by 79 percent of the Panel. The newer senses of beg the question will probably continue to flourish because "begging a question" suggests "begging for," or "raising" a question. However, this broader usage will also probably continue to draw the ire of philosophers and others who use the "circular reasoning" sense of the term, for which there is no good substitute, and do not want to see its technical meaning lost. 

       — “For which there is no good substitute.” Hear hear! 

     AHD’s note strikes me as particularly helpful. It shares with the NOAD the notion that the “new” meaning of BtQ is about a century old. 

     On the other hand Dictionary.com asserts that 

     This phrase [meaning “assuming what is to be proved”], whose roots are in Aristotle's writings on logic, came into English in the late 1500s. In the 1990s, however, people sometimes used the phrase as a synonym of “ask the question” (as in The article begs the question: “What are we afraid of?”). 

     Wiktionary seems to take a similar view when it states, “The sense ‘raise a question, prompt a question’ is more recent….” My impression is that the "raise the question" sense suddenly spread in the 80s. Or maybe the great outbreak occurred in the 90s. Could be.

     Wiktionary further asserts that “The [traditional] sense is not well understood except in specialized contexts, such as in academic and in legal argument. It is based on a sense of beg which is no longer common.” 

     Yes, but the traditional concept or category of BtQ is important, and it is a shame that we are losing—or have lost—this valuable verbal tool. 

     As I’ve grown older, I’ve come to see myself—and users of language generally—as travelers along a long and diverse road in which the folk encountered invariably imagine that their tools are the right tools, the only tools, for whatever needs doing. The traveler, however, to the extent that he has traveled, would never conceive such a notion. 

     I recommend such cosmopolitanism.