What is wroung with this deduction?

Question

Bread crumbs are better than nothing

Nothing is better cheescake

Therefore bread crumbs are better than cheescake

Do you know the name for this kind of error??

Answer 1

In the first case the statement means that bread crumbs are better than no food at all.

In the second case cheesecake is better than any other food.

The sloppy use of Nothing is the central problem. Both statements rely on the reader to understand the context and know what Nothing means in that particular case.

So, although A and C are clearly defined objects of a similar type that can be compared, because B isn't really the same B in both cases you can't deduce a relationship between A and C.

Equivocation.

Answer 2

The form of this is Hypothetical Syllogism, which is actually a valid form, meaning it would be correct to use this argument.

Hypothetical Syllogism is this:

If A, then B

If B, then C

B, so therefore C

In your argument,

A=bread crumbs

B=nothing

C=cheesecake

The only thing I can find wrong, though, is that you used a false analogy, which is actually INVALID.  

"Bread crumbs" and "nothing" can not really be compared because they are completely different things.  I don't think anything can be compared to "nothing" because there isn't anything that is equal with "nothing."

I hope this makes sense, it is kind of hard to explain over the internet. :)

Answer 3

It's a fallacy of composition. It's the same example used on the wiki page for equivocation, just look it up.

Answer 4

I haven't taken a logic course, but here's what I noticed. For starters, all three comments are opinion statements, but I don't think that matters here.

The problem starts when you reach the second line. "Nothing is better than cheesecake". This does not literally mean that the object called "Nothing" is better than the object called "Cheesecake". In this statement, "Nothing" does not name an object, but rather it states that there is no object that is better than cheesecake. The problem is that "Nothing" is an ambiguous term here, I think. But then again, I haven't taken a logic course