Critical Thinking

Write a paragraph on abductive reasoning. Accurate explain the concept in your own words, and then give an example to illustrate your understanding of it.

Abductive reasoning is known as "inference to the best explanation" and relates to the processes of scientific investigation to understand the world. At a very basic level, we use abductive reasoning to understand things nearly every day. As an example, when I got into my car today to go to work, I discovered that my car would not start. Immediately, I wondered why, and that is the start of the abductive reasoning process. I wanted to discover the best explanation for why my car was not starting, so that I could then fix it and get to work. At first I theorized that I might be out of gas, but then I remembered that I just filled the tank yesterday, which falsified that theory. My next theory was that my battery was dead, which led me to hypothesize that, if so, my car might get going with a jump start from another battery. Fortunately, my roommate was at home with her car and she had some jumper cables too, which enabled us to test my hypothesis. The jump start worked and my car started, so I took off for work. But on the way I further deduced that my explanation, if correct, entailed that I would not be able to start my car again if I turned it off. So, I bought a new battery on my way there, before turning my engine off at work. Without abductive reasoning, none of that would have been possible. I would have just been stuck at home, helpless, without any understanding of why my car would not start. Only by forming explanations that can be falsified and tested can we figure out what the best explanations are.

Write a paragraph to demonstrate your understanding of confirmation bias. Provide an accurate explanation of the concept in your own words, and then give an example that illustrates how it can happen.

Correct Confirmation bias occurs when people just look for what they want to believe and only pay attention to information that supports that belief. It is called "confirmation" bias due to our tendency to notice what confirms our beliefs, and it is a bias because it causes us to ignore relevant disconfirming information and keeps us from objectively considering all of the facts. This bias is understandable because people want their beliefs to be true and it can be uncomfortable to consider things that might challenge them. An example is when people on social media like facebook are typically friends with similar-minded people who post things in agreement with their beliefs. This can create a bubble of confirming information that supports their beliefs. If you believe in a conspiracy theory and then become friends with a bunch of believers who constantly post memes and videos that support that theory (while maybe also de-friending people who disagree), you are putting yourself into an environment that just confirms your belief. If you don't balance it out by considering whether there is relevant opposing evidence or other considerations, then you could end up thinking you have good support for something that might actually be false. If your belief is really true on the other hand, then there should be nothing to fear in looking at all of the relevant evidence.

Give an example of a valid argument. Clearly state the argument, and then provide an accurate explanation of its validity.

Correct If Shango is a cat, then Shango is a mammal. Shango is a cat, so Shango is a mammal. This is a valid argument. It contains two premises: 1. If Shango is a cat, then Shango is a mammal. 2. Shango is a cat. The conclusion that Shango is a mammal necessarily follows from these premises. In other words, if these premises are true, then the conclusion must be true as well, which is what it means for an argument to be valid. The second premise affirms the antecedent of the first premise, which is a known valid inference in logic. Even if you don't know anything about Shango, you know that Shango must be a mammal if Shango is a cat, because all cats are mammals. It is impossible for Shango to be a cat but not a mammal, given the assumption that all cats are mammals, which is what the first premise states.

A "straw man" is a kind of valid argument, named after the ability of this logical form to withstand attacks.

False

An argument can contain either a premise or a conclusion, but not both.

False

Reputation is irrelevant to the quality of secondary sources.

False

Critical thinking is the systematic process of rejecting all beliefs and opinions.

False, critical thinking does not entail rejecting all beliefs and opinions. It involves the evaluation of beliefs and opinions according to reasoning and evidence. Some beliefs and opinions may be supported by such evaluation, while others may not.

A general principle of abductive reasoning is that correlation entails causation.

No, this is false. There are many ways in which correlations can exist without entailing causation.

Write a paragraph in which you evaluate the following argument by applying what you have learned from the course: If Shango is a dog, then Shango is a mammal. But Shango is not a dog, so Shango is not a mammal.

This is an invalid argument. Even if the premises are true, the conclusion would not necessarily be true as well. There are two premises: 1. If Shango is a dog, then Shango is a mammal. 2. Shango is not a dog. The conclusion that Shango is not a mammal does not logically follow from these premises. To give a counterexample, Shango could be a cat, in which case both of the premises would be true but the conclusion would be false. The error in this argument is that the second premise denies the antecedent of the first premise, which is not a valid inference.

If an argument is deductively valid, then it is impossible for it to have true premises and a false conclusion.

This statement is true. Valid arguments are arguments for which the truth of the premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion as well.

A "black swan" event is an event that defies both previous experience and expectations based on that experience, making it almost impossible to predict.

True

Confirmation bias is the tendency to use new information only to confirm existing beliefs, rather than seeking to improve and clarify your understanding.

True

Occam's razor is the principle that, when choosing between explanations, the simplest one is usually best, while more assumptions make something less likely to be true.

True

Write a paragraph describing what you learned from Chapter 6 about distinguishing between good and bad sources of information. Choose one important factor to discuss in some detail, explaining how it applies to evaluating the quality of a source.

We are exposed to many sources of information in today's world, but not all of that information is true or trustworthy. So, it is important for us to be able to evaluate sources of information to distinguish the good from the bad. I have learned that there are many different important factors to consider here. First, sources of information can be distinguished between primary and secondary sources. Primary sources are direct pieces of information, while secondary sources are products of other people's work. For example, dark clouds coming towards me would be a primary source that it is going to rain, while the prediction of a meteorologist on the news would be a secondary source. When evaluating sources, one very important factor to consider is relevance: you must make sure that the information you are getting is relevant to what you want to find out. For example, if I want to know what the weather is like in Beijing China, it would be pointless for me to turn on the local Arkansas news. Even if the Arkansas meteorologist is a very reputable and authoritative source (which are also important factors to consider), the information will not be relevant to the weather in Beijing. To find out the weather there, I will need to find another reputable and authoritative source that is relevant to that particular area. If the Arkansas meteorologist predicts rain and I conclude that it is probably going to rain in Beijing, my conclusion would not be trustworthy. Even though I may have a trustworthy source, it is not relevant to my particular question and thus would not be a good source of information in this case.