Undistributed Middle in Literature

Undistributed Middle in Literature: Introduction

The undistributed middle in literature, a fallacy rooted in logic, finds intriguing applications in literature, transcending its traditional role in deductive reasoning. In literary analysis, this fallacy manifests when authors draw faulty connections between characters, themes, or ideas by erroneously emphasizing shared attributes. This misuse of logic can lead to misleading conclusions or misinterpretations within the narrative. As writers navigate the complexities of rhetoric and argumentation in literature, understanding the undistributed middle becomes pivotal in maintaining coherence and validity. Exploring how this fallacy operates within the nuanced landscape of storytelling enriches the study of literature by unveiling the subtle interplay between logic and narrative craft.

Undistributed Middle in Literature: Shakespearean Examples

Shakespearean Example	Explanation
Example 1: “Macbeth”	Premise 1: Macbeth is ambitious. Premise 2: Lady Macbeth is ambitious. Conclusion: Therefore, Macbeth and Lady Macbeth have the same moral character, ignoring other factors contributing to their actions and motivations.
Example 2: “Romeo and Juliet”	Premise 1: Juliet loves Romeo. Premise 2: Juliet’s Nurse loves Juliet. Conclusion: Therefore, Juliet’s Nurse and Romeo share a similar type of love, oversimplifying the complex nature of romantic and familial affection in the play.
Example 3: “Othello”	Premise 1: Othello is a Moor. Premise 2: Iago is a Moor. Conclusion: Therefore, Othello and Iago must have identical cultural and moral backgrounds, neglecting the crucial distinctions in their characters and motivations.
Example 4: “Hamlet”	Premise 1: Hamlet is indecisive. Premise 2: Ophelia is indecisive. Conclusion: Therefore, Hamlet and Ophelia share the same flaw, oversimplifying their complex characters and the unique circumstances influencing their decision-making.
Example 5: “Julius Caesar”	Premise 1: Brutus is honorable. Premise 2: Cassius is honorable. Conclusion: Therefore, Brutus and Cassius possess identical moral virtues, disregarding the contextual nuances and conflicting motives that drive their actions throughout the play.

Undistributed Middle in Literature: Examples

1. Harry Potter Series by J.K. Rowling:
   • Premise 1: Harry can speak Parseltongue.
   • Premise 2: Tom Riddle can speak Parseltongue.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, Harry is the heir of Slytherin.

In this example, the fallacy occurs because the ability to speak Parseltongue is not exclusive to the heir of Slytherin, as evidenced by Tom Riddle.

2. Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare:
   • Premise 1: Juliet loves Romeo.
   • Premise 2: Romeo loves Juliet.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, their families will accept their love.

The undistributed middle here is the assumption that mutual love between Romeo and Juliet will automatically result in acceptance from their feuding families.

3. Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen:
   • Premise 1: Darcy is wealthy.
   • Premise 2: Bingley is wealthy.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, both Darcy and Bingley are equally eligible bachelors.

This oversimplification ignores other important factors such as character and values that play a crucial role in the story.

4. The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald:
   • Premise 1: Gatsby throws extravagant parties.
   • Premise 2: Tom Buchanan throws extravagant parties.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, Gatsby and Tom are equally morally bankrupt.

The undistributed middle here is assuming that similar behaviors imply similar moral character, neglecting other aspects of their personalities.

5. Animal Farm by George Orwell:
   • Premise 1: Snowball opposes the humans.
   • Premise 2: Napoleon opposes the humans.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, Snowball and Napoleon have the same goals.

This oversimplification ignores the different motivations and methods used by Snowball and Napoleon in the pursuit of their goals.

6. Lord of the Flies by William Golding:
   • Premise 1: Ralph wants order.
   • Premise 2: Piggy wants order.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, Ralph and Piggy have the same leadership capabilities.

This overlooks the differences in leadership styles and the characters’ ability to adapt to the challenges they face on the island.

7. To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee:
   • Premise 1: Atticus defends Tom Robinson.
   • Premise 2: Miss Maudie supports Atticus.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, everyone in Maycomb supports Tom Robinson’s innocence.

This oversimplification ignores the racial prejudices prevalent in Maycomb and the varying attitudes toward Tom Robinson’s trial.

8. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger:
   • Premise 1: Holden Caulfield dislikes phonies.
   • Premise 2: Mr. Spencer dislikes phonies.
   • Fallacy: Therefore, Holden and Mr. Spencer share the same perspective on life.

This oversimplification overlooks the broader context of each character’s experiences and the reasons behind their attitudes toward phoniness.

Undistributed Middle in Literature: Relevance in Literary Theories

1. Formalism:
   • Relevance: Formalism, which focuses on the intrinsic elements of a literary work, could potentially fall into the undistributed middle fallacy if it makes assumptions about the meaning of a work based solely on its formal features without considering external factors. For instance, assuming that a poem’s rhyme scheme alone determines its thematic depth would be committing the undistributed middle fallacy.
2. Marxist Literary Theory:
   • Relevance: Marxist literary theory often analyzes literature through the lens of class struggle and economic structures. The undistributed middle could occur if one assumes that the economic conditions of a society directly determine the meaning of a literary work without considering other cultural or individual factors.
3. Feminist Literary Theory:
   • Relevance: Feminist literary theory focuses on the representation of women and gender roles in literature. The undistributed middle might be present if one assumes that the gender of an author alone determines the feminist or anti-feminist nature of a work without considering the specific content and context of the text.
4. Psychoanalytic Literary Theory:
   • Relevance: Psychoanalytic theory, particularly Freudian analysis, might exhibit the undistributed middle if it assumes that certain symbols or themes in literature have a universal meaning based solely on Freudian concepts, without considering the specific cultural or historical context of the work.
5. Postcolonial Literary Theory:
   • Relevance: Postcolonial theory explores the effects of colonialism on literature and culture. The undistributed middle could occur if one assumes that any text from a colonized region is inherently anti-colonial or that all works from colonizers are inherently colonialist, without considering the nuances of individual texts.

Undistributed Middle in Literature: Relevant Terms

Fallacy	Definition
Ad Hominem	Attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself.
Straw Man	Misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make it easier to attack.
False Analogy	Making an inappropriate or misleading comparison between two things.
Hasty Generalization	Drawing a conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence.
Circular Reasoning	Restating the argument rather than proving it.
Red Herring	Introducing irrelevant information to divert attention from the main issue.
Appeal to Authority	Relying on the opinion of an authority figure instead of providing evidence.
Post Hoc Fallacy	Incorrectly assuming that one event caused another because it occurred afterward.
Begging the Question	Assuming the truth of an argument’s conclusion within the premise itself.
Appeal to Ignorance	Arguing that a claim is true because it has not been proven false, or vice versa.

Undistributed Middle in Literature: Suggested Readings

1. Aristotle. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by George A. Kennedy, Oxford UP, 2007.
2. Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams. The Craft of Research. 4th ed., University of Chicago Press, 2016.
3. Graff, Gerald, and Cathy Birkenstein. They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. 3rd ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 2014.
4. Heinrichs, Jay. Thank You for Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln, and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion. 3rd ed., Three Rivers Press, 2017.
5. Lanham, Richard A. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. 2nd ed., University of California Press, 1991.
6. Lunsford, Andrea A., John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. Everything’s an Argument with Readings. 8th ed., Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2019.
7. Perelman, Chaim, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Translated by John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver, University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
8. Strunk, William, and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed., Pearson, 1999.