Final answer:
The statement is false; an amphiboly fallacy is due to ambiguous syntax, not a shaky premise being restated in the conclusion.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that an amphiboly fallacy occurs when an arguer begins with a shaky premise and the conclusion restates that premise is false. An amphiboly fallacy involves a confusion in the structure of a sentence, allowing for multiple interpretations, and is typically due to ambiguous syntax, not the restatement of a shaky premise. On the other hand, what is described in the question is closer to the fallacy of begging the question, where the conclusion is simply a restatement of the premise, assuming what needs to be proven.
Examples of various fallacies:
- Begging the question occurs when the conclusion that is being argued for is already assumed in the premise; it's sometimes referred to as circular reasoning.
- False dichotomy arises when only two options are considered, when in fact more exist.
- A no false premises condition suggests a belief cannot be considered knowledge if it was inferred from falsehoods.