logic exam #2

cause

inductive reasoning. A causes B. takes a known effect and attempts to establish its cause. Once the speaker establishes this relationship he can infer that whenever the cause is present/absent, the effect will be present/absent.

campaign

a coordinated argument. An argument that stretches across multiple audiences and using multi media, posters, print, TV commercials. An ad campaign. Centrally controlled, central funding. Effective when there is a buzz and when people are talking about it.

fallacy

a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound argument. A failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid. Faulty reasoning, misleading or unsound argument.

meme

created out of the litter/extra of campaigns. Created by the inside group, rather than the outside. An idea, behavior, or style that spreads from person to person within a culture.

dilemma

deductive reasoning. a forced choice between 2 or more equally unattractive (or equally attractive) alternatives. Have a closed set, and eliminate both of them, then you are screwed. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. doesn't always have to be bad. Rarely allowed to stand, there is usually a way out of them.

disjunctive syllogism

deductive reasoning. limits a decision to 2 or more choices, eliminates all but one of the choices. Ex. Multiple choice questions on a test. Reduce argument to one option, eliminate.

categorical syllogism

deductive reasoning. sets up a broad category, identifies a quality shared by the entire category, shows the instance in question falls within the category and so exhibits the quality. "Human" is a category that we could recognize in the room, but "brain dead" would be something on the edge, they are missing human attributes. Once you've defined a category, can place things inside or out of a category. Major premise: at lease one attribute shared by the whole category. Humans are all mammals. Minor premise: an instance, a subtype of that broader type.is a piece. Fit that piece inside of the category, or outside. If it's inside shares all of the attributes that they all share. Ex. It is always wrong to kill a human, a fetus is a human so it's wrong to kill them. You are stuck with that conclusion. So either find another form of logic, or accept that conclusion.

reducto al absurdum

deductive reasoning. showing that a given premise or set of premises leads to a paradox or absurdity. Is a "test" of logic, to see if we are in a dilemma etc. begins with a premise A, often your own argument/reasoning. If you accept A, then it leads you to B, then you must also accept B as true. You say B is impossible and reject it, so if you reject B then you reject A and what brought you to B.

visual rhetoric

describes how visual images communicate, as opposed to aural, verbal or other messages. Falls under a group of terms.

false analogy

fallacy. 2 similar things act similar in situation, similar, not exactly alike. Apples to apples. Must first have an analogy, a comparison. Something has to be wrong with the comparison. Apples to oranges. Whenever something is compared to Greece it will be a false analogy. They are too unique and different of an example.

slippery slope

fallacy. Have x to y, go down slippery slope and y is bad. Connect all data points. Roll snowball down hill, gets bigger and bigger. All the stops along with way. Can't predict too far into future. Casual reasoning in the future. Fallacy of causation. Stretching too far into the future

red herring

fallacy. anti logic doesn't have any reasoning what so ever. Is irrelevant. Checkers speech lies outside of reasoning structure. Can appear anywhere. Pretending to be reasoned. Fallacy of irrelevance. Pretends it has meaning.

hasty generalization

fallacy. data is driving the conclusion but something is wrong with the data. goes along with inductive generalization. Sample small/sample bias. Something wrong with the sample. Only talking to class, then comparing that to whole school. Taking an example of a group or class, and referring to that sample. It is too small of a sample, could have bias.

false dichotomy

fallacy. fallacy of the closed set. Either or dilemma. Disjunctive syllogism/dilemma. Closed set, set # of choices. You're stupid, no you're stupid. You're with us or against us. Choice being left out. Decision between the extremes

ad hominem

fallacy. occurs with other fallacies, name calling, attacking the person, not the ideas. Calling the prez a "scumbag" ridiculing someone, saying they have big ears.

post hoc ergo propter hoc

fallacy. one thing doesn't necessarily cause another. Casual reasoning, has to had have happened in the past. One thing happening in the past, then another in the past. Because one thing happens after another doesn't mean it caused it. Fallacy of causation.

bandwagon

fallacy. peer pressure because everyone is doing it, doesn't make it a good thing or vice versa. Jump on the bandwagon.

begging the question

fallacy. something that hasn't been proven yet, or with no evidence. connected with categorical syllogism. A circular argument. Claim proves another claim or tries to prove it when it cant be proven. Has a premise with claims. Claim supporting another claim. Premise that hasn't been proven. Mom says something, "because I'm the mom".

sign

inductive reasoning. establishes first that B is a sign of A, then establishes that B is present. Dangerous because there is no direct evidence, most unsecure methods of reasoning. There may be many things that cause the sign in question. -ex. Where there is smoke, there is fire -ex. Someone has blueberry all over their face, so it was probably a blueberry pie

inductive generalization

inductive reasoning. reasoning from a specific instances takes accepted, specific examples and draws from them a general conclusion. It has to have a sample, some sort of example to be inductive generalization. It can be used to: 1. generalize about a broad area or type 2. establish a trend which is likely to continue in the future

analogy

inductive reasoning. the logic of similarity. A=B. danger is that nothing is equal tho. Saying A is like B, but they are not the same. 2 actions are alike in some essential characteristic. Draws from this relationship the general conclusion that the 2 actions will act similarity under similar circumstances. The 2 cases being compare have to be essentially alike. Equal. If works for the goose it works for the gander.

propaganda

info, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

sound arguments

is a kind of deductive argument. Is based on true premises. The logic is true and the premises are true. Purpose of test is to find if you're dealing with a deductive argument, and that it is certain. 1) True: premises must be true 2) Valid: syllogism must be valid. Following the rules.

deductive reasoning

moves from a general principle, to a specific instance. Conclusions flow from the premises that you have accepted are true. More mathematical. "down" he hill. If a pie is blueberry, then each piece will be blueberry, the conclusion is certain.

inductive reasoning

moves from specific instances to a general principle. Probabilities, things that are "probably" true. You have grounds and reasons for them to be true, but they may not be true. "up" the hill. If each piece is blueberry, then the pie will be blueberry. My grandma always makes pie for thanksgiving, she will probably make it this year too.

logical form

the abstract form in which an argument or proposition may be expressed in logical terms, as distinct from its particular content.

visual argument

use images to engage viewers and persuade them to accept something using testimony, examples, empirical facts, and often definition and/or stats.