Editing Loaded question (section)

{{Short description|Question containing an unjustified assumption}}
A '''loaded question''' is a form of  [[complex question]] that contains a controversial [[Tacit assumption|assumption]] (e.g., a [[presumption of guilt]]).<ref>{{cite book |last=Bassham |first=Gregory |year=2004 |title=Critical Thinking |publisher=[[McGraw-Hill]] |isbn=9780072879599 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rBkD0HQJvnsC }}</ref>

Such questions may be used as a [[rhetoric]]al tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.<ref name=Walton/> The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Without further clarification, an answer of either yes or no suggests the respondent has beaten their wife at some time in the past. Thus, these facts are ''[[presupposed]]'' by the question, and in this case an entrapment, because it narrows the respondent to a single answer, and the [[fallacy of many questions]] has been committed.<ref name=Walton/> The fallacy relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a question presupposes something does not in itself make the question [[fallacious]]. Only when some of these presuppositions are not necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question does the argument containing them become fallacious.<ref name=Walton/> Hence, the same question may be loaded in one context, but not in the other. For example, the previous question would not be loaded if it were asked during a trial in which the defendant had already admitted to beating his wife.<ref name=Walton>Douglas N. Walton, ''Informal logic: a handbook for critical argumentation'', Cambridge University Press, 1989, {{ISBN|0-521-37925-3}}, [https://books.google.com/books?id=kswimguc5uYC&dq=%22complex+question%22+%22Loaded+question%22&pg=PA36 pp. 36–37] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230407001900/https://books.google.com/books?id=kswimguc5uYC&dq=%22complex+question%22+%22Loaded+question%22&pg=PA36 |date=2023-04-07 }}</ref>
This [[informal fallacy]] should be distinguished from that of [[begging the question]],<ref name=begging>{{cite web |title=Fallacy: Begging the Question |publisher=The Nizkor Project |url=http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html |access-date=January 22, 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190310182956/http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html |archive-date=March 10, 2019}}</ref> which offers a [[premise]] whose plausibility depends on the truth of the [[proposition]] asked about, and which is often an implicit restatement of the proposition.<ref name=SD>{{cite book |last=Carroll |first=Robert Todd |author-link=Robert Todd Carroll |date=31 July 2003 |title=The Skeptic's Dictionary |publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]] |isbn=0-471-27242-6 |page=51 |url=http://skepdic.com/begging.html |access-date=22 January 2008 |archive-date=28 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190528225205/http://www.skepdic.com/begging.html |url-status=live }}</ref>