sekundärslutning

Sekundärslutning refers to a logical fallacy where a conclusion is drawn from a premise that has not been sufficiently established or is itself a false premise. This differs from a direct conclusion drawn from a true premise. Instead, it involves an intermediate, unproven, or incorrect step. For example, if someone argues that because a particular politician is unpopular, they must be incompetent, this is a sekundärslutning. The unpopularity (premise) is not necessarily indicative of incompetence (conclusion), and the link between the two is unproven or flawed.

The fallacy often arises when speakers or writers rely on assumptions or opinions presented as facts to build their argument. The unsoundness of the initial assumption, or the weak connection made between the assumption and the final conclusion, renders the overall argument invalid. It can be subtle, as the initial premise might appear plausible on the surface. However, upon closer examination, the logic breaks down because the foundation upon which the conclusion rests is faulty.

Identifying sekundärslutning requires careful analysis of the premises and the inferential steps. It is important to question the truthfulness and relevance of the initial statements before accepting the derived conclusion. This type of fallacy can be used to manipulate or mislead an audience by presenting a seemingly logical progression of ideas that are ultimately unsupported.