meaning - 'Therefore' in an illogical logic sense


I have a co-worker that is always saying "Therefore, A B C" when the "A B C" isn't a conclusion from any sort of deductive reasoning. For example,



Me: ... thus, that's how it works.
Her: I think you are wrong about that. Therefore, I know I'm right.



I was wondering if this use of therefore is appropriate. Should therefore only be used (much as in the symbolic logic sense) when what's being concluded is beyond a reasonable doubt?



Answer



No, therefore should not be reserved for conclusions beyond a reasonable doubt. It is merely a transition similar to thus or as such:



Therefore, I ordered pepperoni.


Thus, I ordered pepperoni.


As such, I ordered pepperoni.



The extended conversation could have been:



I like meat on my pizza. Therefore, I ordered pepperoni.



You can test for an appropriate use of therefore by flipping the sentence order and using because:



I ordered pepperoni because I like meat on my pizza.



The contention that the therefore segment should be restricted to perfect logical use is forgetting that the word really only serves to draw a causal link between statements.



I like red. Therefore, I painted my wall red.



There is no logic here. I am just explaining why I painted the wall red.


Now, if someone is using therefore as a logical link and the logic sucks, you can say that the argument is bad. But the use of therefore isn't the problem.



This $10 item is 50% off; therefore I am saving $6.



This is wrong, but the use of therefore isn't incorrect because it is simply communicating the thought. The communication is accurate; that makes therefore the appropriate word. Replacing therefore with a different word changes the meaning of the sentence (and could correct the logic) but the intent of the speaker no longer matches the communication.




Edit: Since there seems to be some confusion about the actual definition of the word, here is what my dictionary says:



for that reason; consequently : he was injured and therefore unable to play.



Reason, in this context does not mean "logic". It just means "why".



Why couldn't he play? / He was injured.


He was injured and therefore unable to play.


He was unable to play because he was injured.



It is worth noting that there is a strict logical use for the term therefore that explicitly means something akin to "logically derived from the previous statements" but that would be applicable to formations of the following:





  1. All men are mortal




  2. Aristotle is a man




  3. Therefore, Aristotle is mortal





This is commonly represented by three dots in a triangle (∴). But even in this case, the use of therefore is a signal of a specific meaning. If the conclusion is false, it was not an incorrect use of therefore but simply faulty logic. Removing or changing the word doesn't make the problem go away.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

verbs - "Baby is creeping" vs. "baby is crawling" in AmE

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

phrases - Somebody is gonna kiss the donkey

typography - When a dagger is used to indicate a note, must it come after an asterisk?

etymology - Origin of "s--t eating grin"