Psychology 110 Exam 3

Testability

- A hypothesis is only scientific if it is testable - Cannot determine if it is true or false if it can't be tested. - Hypothesis must predict something more than what is predicted by the background theory alone

False Analogy

- An analogy is an attempt to explain something relatively familiar by referring to something different but more familiar. - "This is like that" - False Analogy claims similarities that do not withstand scrutiny (Comparing things that are not similar) - To say humans are immoral is like saying a car can run forever

Meaningless Statement

- An explanation in which the reasons make no sense. - "Helping people to see better, one hour at a time"

Irrelevant Premises

- Appeal to Ignorance - Appeal to Fear - Straw Man

Irrelevant Promises

- Appeal to person - Genetic Fallacy - Appeal to Authority - Appeal to Tradition - Appeal to Ignorance - Appeal to Fear - Straw Man

Unwarranted Assumptions

- Assumptions become unwarranted when you starting taking too much for granted - I have smoked for 10 years and I haven't gotten sick so I will never be sick because of smoking - They are usually implied rather than being expressed directly - You should always try to read between the lines for unexpressed ideas and then identify if the assumptions are warranted or not - Common assumptions include: People's senses are always trustworthy, Familiar ideas are more valid than unfamiliar ideas, Majority view is the correct one, Change is always for better

Unacceptable Premises

- Begging the Question: Arguing in a circle, Using conclusion as a premise - False Dilemma: Presumes only two alternatives exist., A fallacy because it dismisses other options out there that could be better or possible - Example: Either you buy me this new book, or you think that reading is not important at all.

Absolutism

- Belief that there must be rules but no exceptions. - Expect the truth about issues to be clear-cut, certain and simple when in reality, it is often ambiguous, less than certain and complex - Tend to be impatient in their thinking: Susceptible to oversimplification and hasty conclusions - HOWEVER, it is... Possible to believe in absolutes without being an absolutist - Murder is always morally wrong - However, culpability for the act may depend on circumstances

Bias for or Against Change

- Bias for change is more common than it used to be - Live in an age of change - Some changes are for the better but not all; as humans, we sometimes tend to overlook this factor. - Bias against change is still more prevalent than bias for change. - Familiarity is preferred - Mine-is-better thinking - Resist ideas that challenge our sense of security

Errors of Procedure

- Biased Consideration of Evidence - Double Standard - Hasty Conclusion - Overgeneralization and Stereotyping - Oversimplification - Post Hoc Fallacy

Irrelevant Premises: Composition

- Claim that what is true of the parts is also true of the whole - A is part of B A has property X Therefore, B has property X - Ex. (A is part of B) Each brick in that building (A has property X) weighs less than a pound. (Therefore, B has property X) Therefore, the building weighs less than a pound.

Errors of Expression

- Contradiction - Arguing in a Circle - Meaningless Statement - Mistaken Authority - False Analogy - Irrational Appeal

Judgement

- Def: conclusions arrived at through examination of evidence and careful reasoning. - Products of thinking-weighed and evaluated - However, that does not guarantee their worth or wisdom - Can reflect misconceptions about truth, knowledge, and opinion - When making judgments, many times we confuse dilemmas with problems. But they are very different from one another

Overgeneralization

- Drawing broad conclusions from particular experiences. - Natural and necessary for learning - If done reasonably, generalizing can teach us a lot about things around us - HOWEVER, to over generalize is to ascribe to all the members of a group that fits only some members. - i.e., all New Yorkers are rude

Irrational Appeal

- Encourages people to accept ideas w/out question; pressure to conform - Irrational appeal to: Emotion, Tradition, Moderation, Authority, Common belief, Tolerance

Every Decision is a Trade-Off

- Every decision you take, the outcome will always have both "pluses" and "minuses" - Whatever choice you make leaves all the other choices behind - It is wise to make an assessment of the advantages and the disadvantages of all of your alternatives before arriving at a judgment

Mindless Conformity

- Following others' example because we are too lazy or fearful to think for ourselves. When you just go along with the crowd - Advertisers encourage mindless conformity. - Need to avoid following the majority simply because they are the majority. - Need to resist the pleading, teasing, prodding of others - Ask yourself what is right and follow that path - Can conform to: Religion, Peers, Authority

Mistaken Authority

- Giving authority to someone who does not possess it. - Celebrities; experts in one field presenting themselves as authorities in another-i.e., scientists as ethicists

Insufficient Premises

- Hasty Generalization - Faulty Analogy - False Cause - Slippery Slope

Expressing Judgments

- How we express our judgments can alter their meanings. To effectively express judgments, we need to: Strive for a balanced view, Deal with probability, Make your subject appropriately specific, Make your predicate exact, Include all appropriate qualifications: "American men (not all men) over forty who never attended college (not members of all age groups and educational levels) tend to be opposed to the idea of women's liberation advocated by the National Organization for Women" (not the idea of women's liberation in general but only the idea that is advocated by the organization), and Avoid exaggeration

Criteria of Adequacy

- Hypotheses bring harmony to facts that may have seemed disjointed and unrelated. - Criteria of Adequacy: How well a hypothesis systemizes and unifies our knowledge and increases our understanding - Marvin Harris: aim of scientific research is to create theories which are: Predictive, Testable (or falsifiable)-can be proven wrong. Parsimonious (simple)-not too complicated, Of broad scope-can cover a lot, Can integrate with current knowledge

Sample Size: Enumerative Induction

- Inadequate sample sizes can lead to hasty generalizations. - Generally, the larger the sample, the more reliably it signifies the nature of the target group.

Hypothetical Induction

- Inference to the Best Explanation - Phenomena p. Hypothesis b explains p. No other hypothesis explains p as well as b. Therefore, it's probably that b is true - Most widely used form of inference. - Difficult not because no explanation can be found, but rather too many explanations can be found - Have to identify which among all is the best; determined by: the amount of understanding it produces, how well it systemizes and unifies our knowledge

The Significance of Hypotheses

- Investigation can only occur after a hypothesis has been formulated. - Data collection in the absence of a hypothesis has little or no scientific value. - Hypotheses are needed for scientific observation because they tell us what to look for (distinguish relevant from irrelevant information) - Hypotheses are designed to account for data (to help you lead your research or experiment in the right direction)

Post Hoc Fallacy

- Is the basis for most superstition - Reasoning that when one thing occurs after another, it must be the result of the other. - Failure to realize that mere order and closeness in time does not prove a cause-and-effect relationship - One event following another can be pure coincidence - Ex: My child broke her leg after she was vaccinated, so vaccines cause broken legs

Fallacious Arguments

- Logically fallacious arguments are bogus but psychologically compelling. An argument is fallacious if it contains: Unacceptable premises, Irrelevant premises, Insufficient premises - In good arguments: Premises provide a firm basis for accepting the conclusion, The conclusion follows the premises, The premises eliminate reasonable grounds for doubt.

Affirming the Antecedent

- Modus Ponens ("the way that affirms by affirming") - Any arguments in the form is always valid - if p then q. p. therefore q - ex. if you play with fire you will get burned.. You played with fire Therefore, you got burned

Denying the Consequent

- Modus Tollens ("the way that denies by denying" - Any argument in this form is always valid - If p then q Not q Therefore not p - if we assume that q is false, we can infer that p is false (for if p were not false then q could not have been false either) - Remember: the conclusion has to be true if the premises are true

Sample Representativeness: Enumerative Induction

- Must be like the target group in all relevant ways - Avoid biased samples

Disjunctive Syllogism

- Non conditional valid form of argument (no conditions attached) - Either p or q Not p Therefore q - ex. Either the meeting is at home or at school The meeting is not at home Therefore the meeting is at school

A Warning about Hypotheses

- One can never completely confirm or deny a hypothesis - we might come across more information/evidence for or against it. - Maintaining a hypothesis in the face of contradicting evidence can be unreasonable. - You must be wary of ad hoc hypothesis: Creating ideas or theories that account for data that already exists when they can't be tested independent of the phenomenon they are meant to explain - We have to be able to test our hypotheses

Relativism

- Opposite of Absolutism - A relativist believes that the existence of exceptions proves there can be no rules - Belief that "truth is created and not discovered" - Whatever a person believes is true is, by that belief, true for him or her. - Problem: morality is subjective rather than objective (rules only binding to those who accept them), opposes critical thinking, the study of ethics and the processes of law. - Relativists cannot challenge the correctness of other people's views without contradicting themselves

Errors of Perspective

- Poverty of Aspect - Unwarranted Assumptions - The Either/Or Outlook - Mindless Conformity - Absolutism - Relativism - Bias For or Against Change

Hasty Conclusion

- Premature judgment: one that is made without enough evidence - Common in issues of free speech Many people who are outspoken proponents of free speech for ideas they agree with are eager to silence those they disagree with

Arguing in a Circle

- Proving a statement by repeating it in a different form - Ex. Divorce is on the rise today because more marriages are breaking up

Enumerative Induction

- Reasoning used to arrive at a generalization about a group of things after observing only some members of that group - Premise: % of the observed members of a group that have a particular property - Conclusion: % of the members of the whole group that have that property

Poverty of Aspect

- Refers to the limitation that comes from taking a narrow rather than a broad view on problems and issues. - Similar to "tunnel vision" - 2 courses: The different academic disciplines that have been introduced over the course of history, The plethora of knowledge that has taken place in every discipline

Principles of Science

- Science seeks to understand the world by identifying general principles that are both explanatory and predictive. - Scientists are interested in knowing how something works - But before scientific investigation can take place, the world is understood to be publicly understandable - Science must be able to withstand public scrutiny. - REMEMBER: it is a mistake to identify science with any one particular worldview because— - Science is a method of discovering the truth, not a particular body of truths - Any procedure that serves systematically to eliminate reasonable grounds for doubt can be considered scientific.

Biased Consideration of Evidence

- Seeking only evidence that confirms your bias - Choosing interpretations that favor your bias even when other interpretations are more reasonable - Often occurs without one's awareness

Dilemmas

- Situations that require choices between competing or conflicting values that cannot be simultaneously or fully resolved - Dilemmas need to be negotiated or navigated, not solved - Referring to dilemmas as problems can lead to: - Trying to seek clear and "correct" answers for dilemmas - BUT there are usually no "correct" answers - Dilemmas generally involve more complex and unsatisfying trade offs and compromises than problems

The Scientific Method

- Steps in scientific method often are considered to be:Observe. Create hypotheses-possible explanations for what we have observed, Seek and investigate information about possible explanations, Test hypotheses; have conclusion(s) - We use scientific method every day when observing, asking questions, investigating, and concluding

Scope

- The best hypothesis is the one that has the greatest scope. - Explains and predicts the most diverse phenomena - The more it unifies and systemizes our knowledge, the less likely it is to be false.

Conservatism

- The best hypothesis is the one that is the most CONSERVATIVE. - The one that fits best with established beliefs - REMEMBER: if beliefs are well-established, it may be difficult to introduce a new hypothesis - The hypothesis may have to conflict with some of our previous beliefs; but the fewer conflicts, the better

Simplicity

- The best hypothesis is the simplest one - Should assume no more than is required to explain the phenomenon in question - The simpler it is, the fewer ways for it to go wrong

The Either/Or Outlook

- The expectation that the only reasonable view of any issue is either total affirmation or total rejection. - It rejects the very real possibility that the most reasonable view may be both/and- in other words, a less extreme view - Example: Either you love coffee or hate coffee, A person is either all bad or all good

Different Factors: Enumerative Induction

- The strength of the enumerative inductive argument depends on the argument being strong and its premises being true. To be strong, it must score well on two counts:Sample size, Sample representativeness

Making Important Distinctions: Between the person and the idea

- The tendency to confuse person with idea - Tendency to look favorably on ideas of people we admire and unfavorably on the ideas of those we dislike - Disregard the ideas of people who we feel don't have ideas on certain subjects

Making Important Distinctions

- To avoid making faulty evaluations, it is very important to know how to be careful in making certain distinctions in judgments 1. Between the person and the idea 2. Between what is said and how it is said 3. Between the individual and the group or class 4. Between matters of preference and matters of judgment 5. Between familiarity and correctness

Guarding Against Errors in Judgment

- To prevent errors in judgment, you should - Know yourself and your biases Be observant - Clarify issues and conduct inquiry - Carefully evaluate evidence we have obtained - Ask yourself: What does the evidence mean? Is it relevant to the issue on hand? Is it significant?

Irrelevant Premises: Appeal to Fear

- Use the threat of harm to advance one's position - "if you do not convict his criminal, one of you maybe her next victim"

Double Standard

- Using one standard of judgment for our ideas - Choosing more demanding standards for ideas that disagree with ours

Irrelevant Premises: Equivocation

- Using the same word in two different sense in an argument. - Switching the meaning invalidates the argument - Example: Noisy children are real headaches.

Analogical Induction

- When we claim that two things that are similar in some respects are similar in some further respect, we make an analogical induction - Formula: Object A has properties F, G, H as well as the property Z. Object B has properties F, G, H Therefore, Object B probably has property Z - Like other inductive arguments, analogical inductions can only establish their conclusions with a certain degree or probability - The more similarities between two objects, the more probable the conclusion. The fewer similarities, the less probable the conclusion - ex. Earth has air, water, and life. Mars is like the Earth in that it has air and water. Therefore, it's probable that Mars has life

The Formula: Enumerative Induction

- X percent of the observed members of group A have property P. - Therefore, X percent of all the members of group A have property P. - Ex. Sixty percent of the apples from the barrel have been tasty. Therefore, 60 percent of all the apples in the barrel are tasty.

Hypothetical Syllogism

- a valid hypothetical form used to think critically about a series of events - Syllogism: deductive argument consisting of two premises and a conclusion (every statement is conditional) - It is the valid rule of inferences - Also known as the principle of transitivity of implication - If p then q If q then r, Therefore, if p then r - Ex. If I do not wake up, then I cannot go to work If I cannot go to work, then I will not get paid Therefore, if I do not wake up, then I will not get paid

Stereotyping

- an overgeneralization that is especially resistant to change - Prevents us from seeing the difference among people within groups - Common types: Ethnic, religious

Affirming the Consequent

- any argument in this form is always invalid - If p, then q Q Therefore, p - ex. If I have a flu, then I have a sore throat I have a sore throat Therefore, I have the flu - invalid since you can have a sore throat for other reasons

Denying the Antecedent

- any argument in this form is always invalid - if p, then q not p Therefore, not q - Ex. If my car is out of gas, it will stop running My car is not out of gas Therefore it will not stop running - other reasons the car could stop running (ex. car battery) - No logical structure

Irrational Appeal: Common Belief

- believe this because most people believe it

Irrelevant Promises: Appeal to Authority

- citing experts, provided that the person cited really is an expert in the field in question is what would make it a legitimate appeal - Also includes celebrity testimonies - we start to see the celebrity and therefore make the judgement that the celebrity does know what she is talking about since she is advertising the product - My sister- in-law; who is a teacher, said that this scohol is not somewhere that I would want to send my children

Irrelevant Promises: Appeal to Tradition

- claim that something must be true because it is a part of an established tradition. - Mothers have always used chicken soup to fight colds, so it must be good for you

Conditional Arguments

- compound statements - "if-then" statements - antecedent: statement following the "if" - consequent: statement after "then"

Evaluating Arguments

- decide whether the premises are true or false - whether the reasoning that leads from them to the conclusion is valid - inquiry requires asking the right questions and investigating to determine the truth or falsity of one or both premises

Identifying Arguments

- easiest way to identify an argument is to find the conclusion first (finding the conclusion makes locating premises much easier) - to find conclusion ask: what claim is the writer or speaker trying to get me to accept? For what claim is the writer or speaker providing reasons?

Making Important Distinctions: Between familiarity and correctness

- familiar ideas are not necessarily the correct ones. - when making judgments, we need to disregard the familiarity or unfamiliarity of the idea, so we can be open to insights from both sides of the issue

Deductive Arguments

- intended to provide conclusive support for their conclusions (when successful, argument is valid and when unsuccessful, argument is invalid) - valid deductive argument: if premises are true, its conclusion MUST be true and Impossible to have true premises and a false conclusion

Inductive Arguments (aka. Bottom- Up logic)

- intended to provide probable support for their conclusions - if inductive argument succeeds in giving probable support to its conclusion, it is said to be "strong" - Unlike deductively valid argument, an inductively strong agrument cannot guarantee the truth of the conclusion if the premises are true - the best an inductively strong agrument can do is show that the conclusion is very likely to be true - Unlike deductive arguments, inductive arguments allow for the conclusions to be false even if the premises are true

Insufficient Premises: Hasty Generalization

- jumping to conclusions): drawing a general conclusion about all things of a certain type on the basis of evidence concerning only a few things of that type. - In Inductive Arguments: an inference from a sample of a group to the whole group is legitimate only if the sample is representative - only if the sample is sufficiently large and every member of the group has an equal chance to be part of the sample. - Meeting one rude person at JFK airport, believing everyone in New York is rude

Irrelevant Premises: Straw Man

- misrepresent someone's claim to make it easier to dismiss or reject. - Caroline says that she thinks her friends should not be so rude to the new girl. Jenna says that she cannot believe that Caroline is choosing to be better friends with the new girl than the girls who have always known her

Contradiction

- no statement can be both true and false at the same time in the same way. - Ex. Suspect admitting crime and then denying any guilt

Cogent argument

- one which provides good reasons for accepting the conclusion - An inductively strong argument with true premises is "cogent" - Inductive arguments are either "strong" or "weak"

Irrelevant Premises: Division

- opposite of the fallacy of composition - Claim that what is true of a whole is also true of its parts - A is part of B B has property X Therefore, A has property X. - Since groups can have properties that their members do not have, such an argument is fallacious. -ex.(A is part of B) Women in the United States (B has property X) are paid less than men (Therefore, A has property X) Therefore, A has property X

ESP

- perception that is not mediated by an organism's recognized sensory organs. - 3 main types of ESP (psi phenomena): Telepathy, Precognition, Clairvoyance

Insufficient Premises: Slippery Slope

- performing a specific action will lead to an additional bad action (or actions), you should not perform that first action. - "If you break your diet and have one cookie tonight, you will just want to eat 10 cookies tomorrow, and before you know it, you will have gained back the 15 pounds you lost"

Making Important Distinctions: Between matters of preference and matters of judgment

- preferences concern taste; judgment concerns interpretations of fact and theory - better to question judgment rather than preference

Inductive arguments

- provide us with new ideas - Inductive arguments seem weaker because there is a possibility of arriving at false conclusions

Irrelevant Promises: Appeal to Person (ad hominem to the man)

- rebutting an argument by criticizing or denigrating its presenter rather than by dealing with the argument itself. - "You can't belive Dr. Jones' is claim that there is no evidence for life after death. After all, he's an athiest"

Oversimplification

- scales down complex ideas to a level that can be understood by people that have less amount of knowledge regarding the subject that is being simplified - HOWEVER, Oversimplification twists and distorts the ideas - Instead of being informative to people, it misleads them. - Example, "We know ourselves better than others know us"

Problems

- situations involving a question that calls for a correct answer - Problems need to be "solved"

Making Important Distinctions: Between what is said and how it is said

- style and substance are quite different. - how someone says something shouldn't impact on how sound or unsound their argument is.

Making Important Distinctions: Between the individual and the group or class

- the individual's views might differ from the group or class to which they belong - what or how an individual feels or acts should not be carelessly attributed to the group, or vice versa

Insufficient Premises: Faulty Analogy

- things that resemble one another in certain respects resemble one another in further aspects. - "People who cannot go without their coffee every morning are no better than alcoholics"

Irrelevant Promises: Genetic Fallacy

- to argue that a claim is true or false on the basis of it's origins - Lisa was brainwashed as a child into thinking that people are generally good. Therefore, people are not generally good.

Insufficient Premises: False Cause

- two events are causally connected when they are not. - Also called post hoc, ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this) - Just because two events are constantly conjoined, it doesn't follow that they are causally related. - "Ever since I started wearing crystals around my neck, I have not caught a cold"

Validity

- validity is not the same as "true" (validity refers to an argument's logical structure, valid arguments: conclusion follows form the premises) - Valid arguments can have: false premises and a false conclusion, false premises and a true conclusion, true premises and a true conclusion - CANNOT have: true premises and a false conclusion

Irrational Appeal: Authority

-accept authority's word w/out question

Irrational Appeal: Tradition

-doing something because it's always been done

Irrational Appeal: Moderation

-moderation in action and emotion always preferable; the right thing

Psychokinesis

-the ability to affect physical objects without the use of the body, by simply thinking about them

Irrational Appeal: Emotion

-use of feelings to induce guilt, fear, anger, pity, love without demonstrating their appropriateness.

Benefits of asking questions

1. Prevents hasty conclusions 2. Allows for the evaluation of each part of the argument individually (rather than settling for an overall evaluation) 3. Helps us to identify both the strengths and the weaknesses of the argument 4. Provides a structure around which to arrange your thoughts. - The answers you arrive at to your questions is what makes up your response to your argument (your side of it)

Basic Principles in Evaluating Arguments

1. The premises are either true or false (correct or incorrect) 2. the reasoning that links the premises to the conclusion is either valid or invalid (to be valid, the stated conclusion, and only that conclusion, must follow logically from the premises) 3. Correct premises plus valid reasoning equal a sound argument

Irrelevant Premises: Appeal to Ignorance

1. using an opponent's inability to disprove a conclusion as proof of the conclusion's correctness - Since there is no proof that something is false, it must be true - "There is no proof that the parapsychology experiments were fraudulent, so I am sure they weren't" 2.using an opponent's inability to prove a conclusion as proof of its incorrectness. - Taking a lack of evidence for one thing to be good evidence for another - "Bigfoot must exist because no one has been able to prove that he doesn't"

Argument

Def: the exchange of opinions between two or more people and the line of reasoning that supports a judgement Purpose: to demonstrate that a claim, or proposition, is true and to determine that a claim, or proposition, is in fact true Types: Inductive and Deductive

Parts of an Argument

Premises: reasons (claims) intended to support another claim, can come before or after the conclusion, must have at least one in a valid argument Conclusions: claims that the premises are intended to support, must have at least one in a valid argument

Disjunction

a statement in the p-or-q format of premise

Deductive arguments

conclusions are already contained in premises

Disjunct

each statement in a disjunction (p or q)

Fruitfulness

the most fruitful hypothesis is the one that makes the most successful new predictions

Parapsychology

the study of extrasensory perception (ESP) and psychokinesis.