Final answer:
The argument commits a fallacy of unwarranted assumption by suggesting that knowledge not retained is not valuable, and a non-sequitur fallacy because the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. Learning has inherent value beyond just memory retention, and acknowledging our limitations can drive us to pursue further knowledge.
Step-by-step explanation:
The logical fallacy in the argument that seems to prove that learning is futile can be categorized as a fallacy of unwarranted assumption. The argument assumes without justification that knowledge gained is not valuable if it can be forgotten. This position neglects the fact that learning and memory are complex processes, and that the act of learning can have intrinsic value beyond the mere retention of information.
Moreover, this argument could also be seen as a non-sequitur fallacy. A non-sequitur occurs when the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. Just because one can forget what they have learned does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that learning is futile, as the knowledge gained can influence thinking and skills even if not actively recalled. The ability to reason, connect concepts, and apply knowledge dynamically often persists beyond the simple act of recollecting specific facts, making learning a worthwhile endeavor.
Focusing on the positive aspects of learning, we can embrace the principle that acknowledging the extent of one's ignorance, as proposed by Socrates, can be a powerful motivator for continued education and improvement. Understanding the limits of knowledge and accepting the impermanence of memory can lead to a more humble and inquisitive approach to learning.