crib thinking final
Evaluate the following passage and (i) indicate whether it contains an argument by analogy, a literal analogy, or an enumerative induction. If the passage contains an argument by analogy, indicate whether the argument is strong or weak. If it does not contain an argument by analogy, you need not select any additional answers: Tolerating a vicious dictator is like tolerating a bully on the block. If you let the bully push you around, sooner or later he will beat you up and take everything you have. If you let a dictator have his way, he will abuse his people and rob them of life and liberty. If you stand up to the bully just once or--better yet--knock him senseless with a stick, he will never bother you again. Likewise, if you refuse to be coerced by a dictator or if you attack him, his reign will be over. Therefore, the best course of action for people oppressed by a dictator is to resist and attack.
Argument by analogy. One instance compared: a bully and a dictator; relevant similarities: tolerating a bully or dictator leads to further abuse; conclusion: the best course of action for people oppressed by a dictator is to resist and attack. The argument is weak because dictators rarely cave in simply because there is violent resistance to their rule.
Evaluate the following passage and (i) indicate whether it contains an argument by analogy, a literal analogy, or an enumerative induction. If the passage contains an argument by analogy, indicate whether the argument is strong or weak. If it does not contain an argument by analogy, you need not select any additional answers: "Look around the world: contemplate the whole and every part of it: you will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions, to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with accuracy, which ravishes into admiration all men who have ever contemplated them. The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the production of human contrivance; of human design, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since therefore the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble; and that the Author of Nature is somewhat similar to the mind of men; though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of work, which he has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove the existence of a Deity, and his similarity to human mind and intelligence." [David Hume]
Argument by analogy. One instance compared: the world and a machine; relevant similarities: adapting of means to ends; conclusion: nature must be designed by an intelligence. The argument is weak because nature is not analogous only to a machine. It is analogous also to a living thing.
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: "An experimental vaccine prevented women from being persistently infected with a [type of human papilloma virus called HPV-16] that is associated with half of all cervical cancers, researchers reported... The study involved 2,392 women from 16 to 23 years in age. Participants were randomly assigned to receive three shots of either an HPV-16 vaccine or a placebo (a dummy substance). The study was double-blinded--that is, neither the investigators nor the study participants knew who got the vaccine and who got the placebo. Participants were followed for an average of 17 months after getting the third shot... [Forty-one] women developed HPV-16 infection--all of these women were in the placebo group... By comparison, no one who got all three vaccine shots developed an HPV-16 infection." [National Cancer Institute]
Conclusion: An experimental vaccine prevented women from becoming persistently infected with a [type of human papilloma virus called HPV-16] that is associated with half of all cervical cancers. Joint method of agreement and difference. Strong.
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: Getting the endorsement of the teachers' union in this town is absolutely essential to being elected to the school board in this city. No one has ever won a seat on the school board without an endorsement from the teachers' union.
Conclusion: Getting the endorsement of the teachers' union in this town is absolutely essential to being elected to the school board in this city. Method of difference. Strong. There is a difference between those who are elected and those who are not, and that difference is the union's endorsement.
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: On Tuesday fifty-two people ate ham sandwiches at Johnny's Deli, and half of these came down with hepatitis. The board of health discovered that the people who became ill had their ham sandwiches made by Johnny's brother, who had hepatitis at the time. This was the only relevant common element among those who got sick. Seems Johnny's brother was the cause of this outbreak.
Conclusion: Johnny's brother was the cause of this outbreak. Method of difference. Strong.
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: Forty-five patients were admitted to Mercy Hospital for pneumonia in December. They were all given standard treatment for pneumonia. After five days, thirty of them were well enough to go home. The other fifteen, however, somehow acquired other infections and were not well enough to be released for fourteen days. The only relevant factor common to these fifteen is this: They all stayed in the same ward (different from the ward that the other group stayed in). Something about staying in that ward is the cause of the prolonged illness.
Conclusion: Something about staying in that ward is the cause of the prolonged illness. Method of agreement. Strong.
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: Scientists wanted to see whether giving prepuberty children dietary supplements of calcium could significantly increase the density of the children's bones. (Bone density is a key part of bone strength.) So they selected seventy-one pairs of identical twins and gave one twin of each pair a daily supplement of extra calcium and the other twin a sugar pill (placebo). All the twins had diets that contained adequate amounts of all nutrients. The investigators monitored the twins and their diets for three years. The only relevant difference between the twins and their diets for three years. The only relevant difference between the twins was the extra calcium that half of them received. At the end of the three years, the scientists found that the twins who had received the extra calcium had significantly greater bone density. They concluded that the extra calcium caused the increased density.
Conclusion: The extra calcium caused the increased density. Joint method of agreement and difference. Strong.
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: For most of the school year the number of disciplinary actions taken weekly because of student misconduct at North High School has remained about the same--roughly ten a week. But for the last month the number of actions per week has gone down considerably--to about six per week. There can be only one reason: Last month the Ten Commandments were posted in the hallway outside the principal's office. This posting was the only significant recent change in the school.
Conclusion: The number of weekly disciplinary actions decreased because the Ten Commandments were posted in the hallway outside the principal's office. Method of difference. Weak. (Many other factors could have affected the number of disciplinary actions besides recent changes in the school. Other possible factors are parental involvement, normal fluctuations in the rate of misbehavior, and the beginning of a sports season.)
Analyze the following causal argument. Identify (i) whether the argument appeals to the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, or correlation; and (ii) whether the argument is strong or weak: In Instance 1, when factors X, Y, and Z were present, E happened. In Instance 2, when factors X, Y, and P were present, E happened. In Instance 3, when factors X and Z were present, E did not happen. In Instance 4, when Z and P were present, E did not happen. And in Instance 5, when X, Z, and P were present, E did not happen. Therefore, Y caused E.
Conclusion: Y caused E. Joint method of agreement and difference. Strong. Although X could have caused E rather than Y, the argument is still strong in the sense that the conclusion is still more likely to be true than false. This is one of the features of inductive arguments in that they only make their conclusion more likely, they cannot guarantee the truth of the conclusion. An inductively strong argument can still have a false conclusion.
For the following causal statement, indicate whether the specified cause is a necessary condition, a sufficient condition, a necessary and sufficient condition, or neither a necessary nor sufficient condition: The mighty Casey hit the ball out of the park, winning the game by one run.
Hitting a home run in this case was sufficient (i.e., enough) to win the game, but not necessary (since the game could have been won other ways).
For the following causal statement, indicate whether the specified cause is a necessary condition, a sufficient condition, a necessary and sufficient condition, or neither a necessary nor sufficient condition: Johann got a good grade on the exam because he studied the night before.
Studying the night before is neither necessary for doing well on the exam (since someone could do well on an exam by studying at other times, or in rare cases, without studying at all), nor sufficient for doing well on the exam (since someone could study the night before and still not do well).
For the following enumerative induction, identify following three components: (i) target group, (ii) sample, and (iii) relevant property: Most people are fed up with celebrities who get on their soapbox and air their political opinions. When people on the street have been asked by TV reporters how they feel about the issue, they almost always say that they wish celebrities would keep their opinions to themselves.
Target group: people in general; sample: people on the street who have been questioned by TV reporters; relevant property: being fed up with celebrities who voice their opinions. The argument is weak. The sample is not representative and is also probably too small.
For the following enumerative induction, indicate the following two things: (i) is the argument strong or weak and (ii) is the sample size sufficient, too small, and/or not representative [for part (ii) select as many as are appropriate]: Most people are fed up with celebrities who get on their soapbox and air their political opinions. When people on the street have been asked by TV reporters how they feel about the issue, they almost always say that they wish celebrities would keep their opinions to themselves.
Target group: people in general; sample: people on the street who have been questioned by TV reporters; relevant property: being fed up with celebrities who voice their opinions. The argument is weak. The sample is not representative and is also probably too small.
For the following enumerative induction, identify following three components: (i) target group, (ii) sample, and (iii) relevant property: University fraternities are magnets for all sorts of illegal activity. Last year several frat brothers were arrested at a frat-house party. And this year a fraternity was actually kicked off campus for violating underage drinking laws.
Target group: university fraternities; sample: at least two fraternities involved in illegal activity; relevant property: illegal activity involving fraternities. The argument is weak. The sample is much too small.
For the following enumerative induction, identify following three components: (i) target group, (ii) sample, and (iii) relevant property: Two hundred samples of water taken from many sites along the Charles River show unsafe concentrations of toxic chemicals. Obviously the water in the Charles River is unsafe.
Target group: water in the Charles River; sample: two hundred samples of water taken from many sites all along the Charles River; relevant property: concentrations of toxic chemicals. The argument is strong.
For the following enumerative induction, indicate the following two things: (i) is the argument strong or weak and (ii) is the sample size sufficient, too small, and/or not representative [for part (ii) select as many as are appropriate]: Two hundred samples of water taken from many sites along the Charles River show unsafe concentrations of toxic chemicals. Obviously the water in the Charles River is unsafe.
The argument is strong. The sample is sufficient.
For the following opinion poll, (i) determine whether the poll results offer strong support for the pollster's conclusion (assuming there were no technical, interview, or data errors in conducting the survey) and if they do not, (ii) specify the source(s) of the problem (i.e., sample is too small, not representative, and/or nonrandom); if the results do support the conclusion, you need not select any additional answers: Anita conducts a survey to determine if Americans are willing to support the arts by contributing money directly to local theater groups. One night she and her assistants interview five hundred people who are attending a performance of a musical at the city's biggest theater. To help ensure random selection, they purposefully select every other patron they encounter for interviewing. There is only one interview question: "Are you willing to support the arts by giving money to local theater groups?" Ninety-four percent of the interviewees answer yes. Anita later reports that a large majority of Americans are willing to support the arts by giving to local theater groups.
The poll does not support Anita's conclusion. The sample is neither random nor representative. The people interviewed actually attended a musical and are therefore self-selected. And, because of their attendance, we can surmise that they are likely to be predisposed toward the arts—unlike many other Americans.
For the following enumerative induction, indicate the following two things: (i) is the argument strong or weak and (ii) is the sample size sufficient, too small, and/or not representative [for part (ii) select as many as are appropriate]: University fraternities are magnets for all sorts of illegal activity. Last year several frat brothers were arrested at a frat-house party. And this year a fraternity was actually kicked off campus for violating underage drinking laws.
The sample is too small. The argument is weak.
For the following opinion poll, (i) determine whether the poll results offer strong support for the pollster's conclusion (assuming there were no technical, interview, or data errors in conducting the survey) and if they do not, (ii) specify the source(s) of the problem (i.e., sample is too small, not representative, and/or nonrandom); if the results do support the conclusion, you need not select any additional answers: A prominent sociologist wants to determine the sexual attitudes of women aged twenty-five to forty-five. The main question explored is whether heterosexual women in this age group feel satisfied with their partners' sexual performance. The sociologist interviews two hundred of her friends who belong to the target group. She also asks two hundred of her female colleagues at her college to complete and return the survey asking the key question. She gets seventy-eight completed surveys back from women in the target group. She finds that 75 percent of all the interviewees say that they are not satisfied with their partners' performance. She concludes that most heterosexual women aged twenty-five to forty-five aren't happy with the sexual performance of their partners.
The survey does not support the conclusion. The sample is not representative of women aged twenty-five to forty-five, for a large portion of the sample is skewed toward well-educated, academic women. The sample is also too small to draw reliable conclusions about the entire target group of twenty-five- to forty-five-year-old women. Neither is the sample random, as the researcher simply chose participants from her own group of friends and colleagues.
Evaluate the following argument by analogy and identify whether it is strong or weak: "If a single cell, under the appropriate conditions, becomes a person in the space of a few years, there can surely be no difficulty understanding how, under appropriate conditions, a cell may, in the course of untold millions of years, give origin to the human race." [Herbert Spencer]
Things being compared: development of a person and of the human race; relevant similarities: both involve biological processes of great complexity taking place under "appropriate conditions" and commencing with a single cell; diversity among multiple cases: not a significant factor; conclusion: under appropriate conditions, a cell may, in the course of untold millions of years, give origin to the human race. The argument is strong.
Evaluate the following argument by analogy and identify whether it is strong or weak: "The mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing argument, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones, and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw, or a lump of dirt." [Henry David Thoreau]
Things being compared: inanimate objects and men who serve the state; relevant similarities: no exercise of judgment or moral sense, being used as physical instruments or objects; diversity among multiple cases: not a significant factor; conclusion: such men of the state "command no more respect than men of straw, or a lump of dirt." The argument is weak.
Evaluate the following argument by analogy and identify whether it is strong or weak: The casinos in Atlantic City have brought a tremendous amount of revenue into bother area businesses and local government, without inviting the evils of organized crime and causing the degradation of law and order or quality of life. The same can be said for the Turning Stone casino in upstate New York, as well as for Casino Niagara in Niagara Falls, Canada. A casino built in Buffalo, New York, will provide all the same benefits without the disadvantages.
Things being compared: the establishment of casinos; relevant similarities: being a casino in and around New York State; diversity among multiple cases: a significant factor because existing casinos were established in very different locations and economic conditions; conclusion: a new casino in Buffalo will bring a tremendous amount of revenue into both area businesses and local government, without inviting the evils of organized crime and causing the degradation of law and order or quality of life. The argument seems strong (although the premises are questionable).
For the following causal statement, indicate whether the specified cause is a necessary condition, a sufficient condition, a necessary and sufficient condition, or neither a necessary nor sufficient condition: Simone lost weight by exercising regularly.
exercising is neither necessary for losing weight (since there are other methods of weight loss) nor sufficient for losing weight (since weight loss can correspond to other factors like diet or genetics).
