Fascinating study of blog ecology (PDF) via Kevin Drum. No thoughts, but here's a language nit: "The denser linking pattern of conservatives begged the question of whether the conservative bloggers had a more uniform voice than the liberal ones did." Philosophers are always bothered by this usage. We prefer to reserve 'beg the question' for venerable 'presuppose your conclusion'. But there is considerable pressure in favor of the shift. Not only is it clear how the phrase could mean what these authors mean by it, but 'x demands that we ask y' is just plain something you often want to say. And 'begs the question' is really better than 'x demands that we ask y'. "The denser linking pattern of conservatives demands that we ask whether the conservative bloggers had a more uniform voice than the liberal ones did." That makes it sound like I'm too worked up, like our little puzzle has just gotta vault to the front of the line. But why doesn't 'begging' sound irrelevantly fawning? Probably because logicians have pawed all the connotations off it. Now that it's worn smooth and servicable, all these folks want to take it from us, damnit. Should I give in? Worry about something important? What do you think?
Humpf. I don't think "begs the question" makes any sense grammatically when used to mean "demands that we ask". It has all the hallmarks of cliche -- a person who writes such a sentence is just putting words together without thinking about their meaning. So I'm with you. Possibly relevant trivia, I seem to remember reading that "begs the question" is a shortening of "beggars the question".
Posted by: Jeremy Osner | March 10, 2005 at 11:01 PM
Don't give in, John. This is a usage fight that's worth fighting. I use "invites" or "raises" the question for the other. But there's too much genuine question-begging in the world for us not to keep the phrase that describes it.
Posted by: Jacob T. Levy | March 10, 2005 at 11:09 PM
Yes, what they mean is "raises" the question. It's sort of like when people say that such-and-such "belies" something else, when they mean "reveals" (the exact opposite of what "belies" actually means). Grrrrr.....
Posted by: bitchphd | March 10, 2005 at 11:34 PM
I'm just going to agree with everyone else. "Raises the question" is perfectly good for what is meant, so there's no reason to be permissivist about "begs the question." And the latter is useful in its own right, no reason to abandon it.
(I once heard an astrophysics seminar with the title "Does the Milky Way galaxy have a bar?" introduced as "A talk whose subject is begged by the question, 'Where should we go for a drink in the Milky Way?'" Wouldn't want to give up the capability for lines like that.)
Love the Nutwork, by the way. Love it.
Posted by: Sean | March 11, 2005 at 12:09 AM
First they came for 'Ontology'
and I did not speak out
because I was an Analytic Philosopher
Then they came for 'Normative'
and I did not speak out
because I was not interested in Ethics.
Then they came for 'Metaphysics'
and I did not speak out
because I was not a metaphysician.
Then they came for 'begging the question'
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Is that the sort of thing you're going for?
Posted by: Dr Pretorius | March 11, 2005 at 12:39 AM
John Holbo is absolutely and completely right. Although the imagery of a set of ideas getting down on their knees and saying, "Please, we beg of you -- you know what question you should ask here!" is maybe a little funny.
Posted by: Adam Kotsko | March 11, 2005 at 12:45 AM
Yup, what Jacob said. "Begs the question" describes something that other phrases don't, so we need to keep it. I was surprised to see it misused in an academic paper. I probably don't read enough academic papers.
(By the way, when trying to post, I get an Invalid URL 'http://www.unfogged.com') Are we on your blacklist now?
Posted by: ogged | March 11, 2005 at 12:54 AM
This is a usage fight that's worth fighting.
it's a fight you've already lost.
nobody, outside philosophers and language pedants, cares what the original meaning was, because its new meaning is both widely used and universally understood.
Posted by: cleek | March 11, 2005 at 04:09 AM
I'm with cleek. In fact, I'm not sure I was more than subconsciously aware of the other meaning until I read this post. I've read it, and understood it, dozens or hundreds of times, but it wouldn't have occurred to me to use it myself.
Posted by: David Moles | March 11, 2005 at 04:32 AM
raises the question.
Posted by: praktike | March 11, 2005 at 04:41 AM
Cleek and Moles, I wholly disagree; while it's futile to try to inhibit new meanings from being formed--this is not an accident of language, but its fundamental character--it's worthwhile to fight for old meanings that provide language its richness.
This new meaning of the phrase, in my opinion, while comprehensible, is simply not as interesting as the old.
Posted by: melancholic | March 11, 2005 at 04:52 AM
This new meaning of the phrase, in my opinion, while comprehensible, is simply not as interesting as the old.
so, come up with a new phrase that means the same as what you want "beg the question" to mean. use Latin, even.
or, use "circular reasoning".
Posted by: cleek | March 11, 2005 at 05:07 AM
"Begs the question" to mean "x demands that y be asked" demeans a great phrase: Raises the question. If you are too stupid or lazy to use it, then there is a spot in the deepest pits of hell reservef for your eternity.
Posted by: Max Edison | March 11, 2005 at 05:14 AM
Given how widely used and universally understood, as an earlier commenter noted, the "wrong" meaning is, I wonder if the "correct" usage is in fact misunderstood by the majority of readers.
Posted by: trostky | March 11, 2005 at 05:33 AM
I wonder if the "correct" usage is in fact misunderstood by the majority of readers.
i didn't know the 'correct' meaning until just a couple of years ago - and i still have a hard time remembering it because the phrase "begs the question" seems completely unrelated to what it used to mean, and very related to what it means today.
Posted by: cleek | March 11, 2005 at 05:35 AM
I'd prefer to hang on to the phrase, but I think it's a lost cause. That's a shame, because as others have pointed out, "begs the question" doesn't really make much sense as a near-synonym of "raises the question".
"Raises the question" is perhaps a little too polite, when the sense you're after is "demands...", but again, "begs" isn't really right either.
We lost "comprises"; I think we've lost "begs the question".
Posted by: Jonathan Lundell | March 11, 2005 at 05:46 AM
All right, now that sentiment on the thread is turning in the direction of evil I'll get *really* cantankerous and say that this isn't just a case of ordinary semantic drift-- that the ["old"] meaning got lost because so few people care about the structure of arguments at all. Fighting to keep the phrase isn't just an instance of fighting to preserve old linguistic usages and distinctions. It's also a fight to preserve the thought that logic matters, and that there are mistakes of argument and reasoning that need to be identified as mistakes.
The semantic drift might not even bother me so much if "begs the question" had drifted into a perjorative term for something else. But the fact that the new meaning is entirely free or perjorative overtones is a bad sign.
Posted by: Jacob T. Levy | March 11, 2005 at 05:48 AM
So even though the usage of the words themselves is sound, priority goes to the idiom. Interesting.
I did not know that.
Posted by: sleepy | March 11, 2005 at 05:50 AM
Never surrender.
Posted by: Gary Farber | March 11, 2005 at 05:51 AM
Well, since it is probably true that in terms of actual usage the horse has long since departed the barn on "begs the question," I have simply reverted to the original phrase "beggars the question," in other words, to render a critical question meaningless with your initial assumptions. I have had no problems with anyone understanding what I meant, the two or three times I have needed that concept.
And FWIW, in my opinion "circular reasoning" doesn't cut it - many premises start out with question-beggaring that never return; in fact, the question left in penury at the outset is often the reason the new, flawed concept can travel so far from its starting point. For example, the statement "We must put more money into the current missile defense program because of developing nuclear threats around the world" beggars the question of whether the current program has any technical potential for success. And look how far that has gone.
Posted by: st | March 11, 2005 at 05:58 AM
Every time a writer writes, "begs the question," when that writer means, "raises the question," he should understand that there will be a significant number of readers who will be forced to stop and interpret what the writer actually means. And those readers will be pissed-off that the writer was so sloppy and inconsiderate of their time and attention.
I would recommend that writers use "begs the question" in this fashion every time they seek to achieve this effect.
Posted by: joe | March 11, 2005 at 06:09 AM
This definitely is a fight worth fighting, since the original meaning of the phrase is so great and essential.
I also think that this isn't just a case of mere drift. Those who use the phrase in the "raises the question" sense are, I think, (unconsciously) attracted to it precisely because it sounds fancier than "raises the question." It still sounds to the ears like something very logical and precise (even if it's no longer being used that way). The result is that the new usage sounds less like a creative, innovative use of language, and more like the non-word "irregardless." Maybe this will change, as the new meaning completely overtakes the old one. But I think that's why this usage grates so much.
Posted by: pjs | March 11, 2005 at 06:24 AM
Frankly, I could care less.
Posted by: Mike | March 11, 2005 at 06:28 AM
The more recent usage would require "begs for the question." Oliver didn't beg the porridge, did he?
So the newer usage is not merely wrong, it's also a solecism.
The difficulty people like Cleek have with the real meaning is that word "question" in this context does not mean an interrogatory. It's an obsolete usage that means "the issue under discussion" (as in "put the question to a vote"). So to "beg the question" means to seek to obtain the desired result for free, as if by begging. When it's understood it's a colorful image and one worth saving.
PS- ST's assumption that "begs the question" is a corruption of "beggars the question" is a classical example of a folk etymology. When the meaning of a word or phrase becomes unclear due to changes in meaning, people attempt to reconstruct the origins in a way that makes sense to them. In so doing they often corrupt the word. A couple of my favorites - "bridegroom," from "bridegome," "gome" being an obsolete word for "man;" and "sparrowgrass" for asparagus, for obvious reasons.
Posted by: JR | March 11, 2005 at 06:29 AM
"Well, I never!" I harrumphed, upon reading JR's snarky insinuations. I yanked down my Dictionary of Modern American Usage and flipped with a flourish to the "b"s. "Begs the question, begs the...aha! It's right here, in black and..." My voice trails off, and is replaced by a short spate of flipping pages, then a snap as I shut the book. "Well, no matter!" I cried, undaunted. "Surely Fowler's will answer!" Striding back to the shelf, I pulled down my trusty 2nd Edition, and cracked it open. More flipping, then silence.
"But...but I was so sure..."
Oh, well. My new problem is that I like "beggars the question," but I now know that I'm just another dope knocking permanence out of the language. And what I'm doing is kind of worse - I'm actively rewiting history, not just stumbling over a turn of phrase. Well, crap.
Posted by: st | March 11, 2005 at 06:48 AM