Psychology and Science Terms and Concepts
What are the three formal fallacies?
1) Affirming the consequent 2) Denying the antecedent 3) The undistributed middle
Which two kinds of information sources does the internet consist of?
1) Commercial and institutional sources 2) Individual and group sources
What are the three kinds of definitions?
1) Definition by example (ostensive definition) 2) Definition by synonyms 3) Analytical definition
According to logical positivism, there are two sources of real knowledge. What are they?
1) Empirical experience (observations) 2) Logical reasoning (with the use of observations)
Positivism notion of facts
1) Facts are objective (immediately given, all the same, unchangeable) 2) Facts are independent of theory
What are two cognitive biases?
1) False consensus effect 2) Bandwagon effect
What are the three kinds of ads?
1) Logos ads 2) Ethos ads 3) Pathos ad
The idea that it is wise to keep in mind what we are not always the most accurate judges of our abilities comes about because of what two illusions?
1) Overconfidence effect 2) better than average illusion
What are Kuhn's four phases of science?
1) Pre-science (pre-paradigm phase) 2) Normal science 3) Crisis 4) Paradigm shift (leading to scientific revolution)
What are the two types of ambiguity?
1) Semantic ambiguity 2) Syntactic ambiguity
Two kinds of prepositions:
1) Simple 2) Composite
What are two problems with logical positivism?
1) The principle used to examine if statements are meaningful (empirical verification) undermines 'philosophy' 2) From facts (I or O) one can induce laws (general claims, A or E). But there are more complex theories.
When is a crisis resolved?
A crisis is resolved when a new paradigm emerges, replacing a previous one, and the discontinuous change constitutes a scientific revolution
When you see a shaded section in a Venn-diagram, what does that mean?
A shaded section means that we assume that there are NO people/observations in that circle, so we shade if it is empty
Proposition (assertion)
A statement (sentence) that can be true or false
Tautology (does not provide new information)
A statement that is true in every possible interpretation (ex. "if it is freezing, then it is freezing")
Contradiction (not allowed in science)
A statement which is always false "it's freezing and it's not freezing"
What is the bandwagon effect?
A tendency to align our belief system with the belief systems of those around us. It is even possible that visual perception is affected by what other people say they are sensing
What is the negativity bias?
A tendency to assign more importance to negative information than positive information (likelihood to believe a negative rumor about something, automatic belief that a new law will produce more harm than good)
What is the fundamental attribution bias?
A tendency to hold those who are "not one of us" especially blameworthy for their actions
The four basic categorical claims
A, E, I, O
What is irrelevant authority?
Accepting argument without proper support for his/her alleged authority (ex. "pacifism is a good idea because the brilliant scientist Einstein advocated it")
What types of modifications must be ruled out by Lakatos's methodology and why?
Ad-hoc, they depart from the hardcore
What is a straw person fallacy?
Addresses only a weak and distorted version (misrepresentation of the opponent's position)
A Claim
Affirmative general claim, so ALL ARE
I Claim
Affirmative observational claim, so SOME ARE
When you see an 'x' in a Venn diagram, what does that mean?
An 'x' stands for some
When is an argument valid?
An argument is valid if the conclusion is true whenever the premises are all true
Aristotle or Galileo? - Relied on direct senses and believed that nature is alive
Aristotle
Galileo or Aristotle- our senses observe the truth
Aristotle
Who believed that nature is alive and that you can pass away, and transform due to natural powers like being able to get fruit from a tree because of DNA?
Aristotle
Who believed that terrestrial objects are made of one of four objects (earth, air, water, fire) and that whatever objects are made of will guide our knowledge of how they move/work?
Aristotle
Whose worldview was replaced by Newtons?
Aristotle
Which philosophers believed that the world consists of two domains: the sublunar (perishable) and the superlunary (imperishable, perfect, i.e. circular orbits) with the earth at the center of the universe?
Aristotle, Ptolemy
Who believed that anomalies (for example) exist of comets that come and go?
Aristotle, Ptolemy
The truth table for 'if A then B' and 'if B then A' is what?
Asymmetrical
Who believes that there is no universal scientific method and that both theories, facts and methods are fallible but ca be improved?
Chalmers
who believes that we can learn through continuous reciprocal interactions with reality?
Chalmers
When a program has been Developed into a stage where it is appropriate to subject it to experimental tests, is it confirmations or falsifications that are more important?
Confirmations
What is syntactic ambiguity?
Confusing sentence structure
What is an argument?
Consists of a sequence of statements called premises and a statement called conclusion.
P not P P and not P *A and B is always false* 1 0 0 0 1 0
Contradiction
Who believed, initially of anomalies like the moon orbiting the earth and that to the naked eye, Mars and Venus are always the same size?
Copernicus and Galileo
What was Copernicus's main contribution to science?
Copernicus believed in a heliocentric, or sun-centered universe in which all planets revolve around the sun
Who believed that the world consists of one domain and the sun at the center?
Copernicus, Galileo
Who criticizes Locke's idea of the social contract, stating that individuals are born into a society that pre-exists them and which, in that sense, processes characteristics they do not choose and cannot be in a position to choose (essentially agreeing with Feyerabend's notion that we want freedom from 'chains')
David Hume
Who believed that scientific knowledge in all aspects must be justified either by an appeal to (deductive logic) or by deriving it from experience?
David Hume (18th.c)
Who believed that through inductive reasoning, you are biased because you are thinking inductively anyway and siding with the idea that the pattern will continue?
David Hume (18th.c)
Conclusion is guaranteed to be true if premises are true. Induction or deduction?
Deduction
Which type of argument is used when we are trying to prove/demonstrate a conclusion?
Deductive reasoning
Logical positivism is what kind of explanation?
Deductive-nomological
What is the hard core of a research program?
Defining characteristics, and general assumptions that a theory can be broken down into
Operationalization
Defining of a concept in terms of the way you go about observing it
What is a lexical definition?
Definitions found in dictionaries telling us what a word ordinarily means
Explanas
Does the explaining
According to Kuhn, what would we do in the normal science phase when we face an anomaly?
Don't throw the paradigm out- instead, remain confident that it is a hard problem and will be solved over time
What is pre-science?
Early stages of science, no fixed paradigm, several paradigms exist side-to-side so there is a debate regarding basic principles
What is the best judgement of expertise?
Education and experience, then accomplishments, reputation and position
Logical positivism -> Science=
Facts+Theories (Laws)
What does "0" stand for in a truth table?
False
Which 'ism' had a problem because it is not possible to locate the cause of a faulty prediction?
Falsificationism
What group in science freely admit that observation is guided by and presupposes theory and abandon claims that imply that a theory can be established as true or probably true in light of observable evidence?
Falsificationists
Which group in science focuses on progress as opposed to definitive answers/truth?
Falsificationists
Challenged philosophers on their own ground by taking examples of scientific change which his opponents consider to be the classic instances of scientific progress and showed that these changes did not conform to the theories of science proposed by those philosophers
Feyerabend
Criticized Lakatos, saying that his criteria for accepting ideas or theories can accommodate almost anything
Feyerabend
Theory is based in an ethical framework, placing high value on individual freedom or "humanitarian attitude", and was in favor of John Stuart Mill in supporting individuality and increase of liberty
Feyerabend
Which philosopher believed that there is no scientific method, but rather than every procedure has to be judged on its own merits and by standards adapted to the processes with which it deals?
Feyerabend
Who argued against Galileo and Copernicus, stating that the earth does not rotate about its axis because in the time it takes a ball to fall from a tower, the earth rotates slightly so the ball should not fall at the foot of the tower but far away, and we do not view it in experiments so Galileo and Copernicus are wrong?
Feyerabend
Who believed in a separation between science and state?
Feyerabend
Who believed that Galileo uses tautology (saying things multiple times in different words) and trickery to make himself sound justified?
Feyerabend
Who believed that it is not arguments, per say which make science excel, and there is no single rule or method/no way to compare how good theories are, but that we must judge each for its own?
Feyerabend
Who believed that rules do not make scientific progress but rather that wild ideas do?
Feyerabend
Who believes that law and order delays/hinders science?
Feyerabend
Who came up with the 'anarchist' view of science?
Feyerabend
Who was a strong believer in the philosophy of science, and believed that certain scientists lack in philosophical depth?
Feyerabend
Who, like Kuhn uses history to defend his case regarding science?
Feyerabend
In his view, why should children be required to learn 'science like physics or biology' as opposed to say, magic?
Feyerabend's view of the institutionalization of science
Who used the spreadsheet model to observe and organize facts?
Francis Bacon
Aristotle or Galileo? - Believed that nature is lifeless and that we should use the telescope to guide our observation
Galileo
Galileo or Aristotle- our senses can deceive us (thought experiments)
Galileo
Who believed that an objects motion is constant unless it is changed by something else (law of inertia)?
Galileo
Who believed that weight and matter were unrelated?
Galileo
Who created the falling bodies experiment and proved that two things of unequal weight will fall at the same time given there is no air resistance (challenged Aristotle)?
Galileo
Who distinguished between velocity and acceleration and denied the Aristotlian claim that all motion requires a cause?
Galileo
Who invented the telescope as an objective judgement/viewpoint?
Galileo
Who laid the foundations of Newtonian mechanics that were to replace Aristotles?
Galileo
Who provided a range of evidence for the phenomenon of irradiation?
Galileo
Who recorded stars accompanying Jupiter to prove that moons orbit Jupiter with a constant period, using a scale?
Galileo
Who was Copernicus's biggest supporter, noticing that when he constructed the first telescope in 1609, he could see a variety of stars with the naked eye?
Galileo
Who was criticized by Feyerabend for tricking, using propaganda and picking at viewers brains rather than actually defending his findings and explaining them?
Galileo
Whose findings about Venus's phases were accepted into the Copernican system but not the Ptolemaic?
Galileo
Whose greatest contribution to science was his work in mechanics?
Galileo
Induction
Generating a general statement from individual cases
Deduction
Generating an individual statement (conclusion) derived logically from other statements (premises)
According to Kuhn, how does an anomaly, then a crisis, then a scientific revolution and a paradigm shift occur?
Gestalt switch; different way of thinking
Definition by synonyms
Giving another word that means that same as the term being defined (ex. tiny, think small)
When it is not clear whether a word is being used to refer to a group collectively or to members of the group individually (could be used intentionally to mess with critical thinking and mislead). What is this an example of?
Grouping ambiguity
Why did Lakatos develop research programs when it comes to the development of theories?
He believed that theories needed time to develop and may come to progress after a generating period, or degenerative after early success
A B ?A?B 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
If A then B
"If A then B" is always 1 unless A=? and B=?
If A=1 and B=0
A B If ? then ? 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
If B then A
Who is a Hungarian who moved to England in the late 1950's, coming under the influence of Karl Popper?
Imre Lakatos
Why was Lakato's methodology created?
In order to get rid of inability to locate source of potential problem in a theory
If we observe that some crows are black and that none are white, we conclude "all crows are black"....what is this an example of?
Induction
What does logical positivism use a combination of?
Induction and deduction
When we try to support a conclusion, which type of argument do we use?
Inductive reasoning
The idea that an explanation that most fully explains, leads to accurate predictions, conflicts least with well-established facts and involves the fewest (un)necessary assumptions is what type of inference?
Inference to the best explanation (IBE)
"I didn't say that Bush invaded Iraq to help his friends in the oil industry. I just said his friends have done very well since the invasion" is an example of what?
Innuendo
Who are the British empiricists in the seventeenth and 18th century, holding that knowledge should be derived from ideas implanted in the mind by way of sense perception?
John Locke, George Berkeley and David Hume
Is logical positivism concerned with the discovery of a theory, the justification of the theory, neither or both?
Justification
According to this person, logical positivism has issues because you become selectively aware of facts that are in favor of your theory, hindering progress. Scientists should focus on falsification as opposed to verification.
Karl Popper
Objective knowledge is knowledge that can be criticized - is an idea of who?
Karl Popper
Science cannot result in certainties, only generate suspicions is a theory by who?
Karl Popper
Who was against logical positivism, arguing that we learn more from our mistakes and that knowledge grows through our attempt to correct errors?
Karl Popper
Who was a forceful advocate towards an alternative method to inductivism known as falsification?
Karl Popper (1920's)
Who was educated in Vienna during a time when logical positivism was being articulated?
Karl Popper (1920's)
Who edited Copernicus, finding that instead of 'circles', planets orbited the sun in 'ellipses'?
Kepler
Empiricism is defined by
Knowledge by experience
What is objective knowledge?
Knowledge without awareness, or no personal bias (ex. wearing a blue shirt and conflicting with someone else who you did not know was also wearing a blue shirt) - their wearing of a blue shirt is to you, objective knowledge
Imre Lakatos's argument that there is a clear line between good and bad science, and that the philosophy of science is normative is an argument against who?
Kuhn
The notion that it depends on the individual, group or culture that makes the judgement regarding whether a paradigm is better or not than the one it challenges is proposed by who?
Kuhn
Who believed that paradigms are incommensurable (incomparable)
Kuhn
Who believed that scientists are not always critical but are perceived to be, and believed we should focus on the context of discovery?
Kuhn
Who believed that social sciences do not have an established paradigm?
Kuhn
Who believed that the activity that proceeds a formation of science eventually becomes structured and directed when a single paradigm becomes adhered to by a scientific community>
Kuhn
Who believed that the concept of a 'better science' may not exist (ex. cognitive psychology vs. behaviorism) and that instead, we are just looking at two different views?
Kuhn
Who believed that there was no "universal method" or way to compare paradigms?
Kuhn
Who believes that the existence of a paradigm capable of supporting a normal science tradition is the characteristic that distinguishes science from non-science?
Kuhn
Who encourages us to look at what scientists actually do rather than prescribe scientific rules?
Kuhn
Who pictured this scientific progression?: Pre-science->normal-science->crisis->revolution->new normal science->new crisis
Kuhn
Who stated that the difference between astrology and astronomy is that astronomers are in a position to learn from predictive failures in a way that astrologers are not?
Kuhn
Who states that a scientific revolution is so much more; not only a change in laws but also a change in the way the world is perceived and a change in standards that are brought to bear in appraising a theory?
Kuhn
Who tries to distance himself from relativism?
Kuhn
the non-normative/non-prescribing, and instead, descriptive view of science to look at what scientists are actually doing/actually do is a view held by who?
Kuhn
Who tried to focus on the theoretical framework in which scientists work?
Kuhn and Lakatos
The notion of no truth finding, no progress and a relativist rather than a realist perspective are consequences of what?
Kuhn's paradigms
Who believed that much of Newtonian mechanics qualify as science, while modern sociology fails to quality as a science?
Kuhn, modern sociology lacks a paradigm
Who practiced a science in which anomalies are ignored or explained away until they get too big to ignore, and what did he propose as a solution?
Kuhn, paradigms
The context of discovery, or descriptions/explanations of the way in which a theory is developed. Part of sociology/history of science where the justification of the theory is as determined by history is a view of whose way of thinking and what type of science?
Kuhn, scientific revolutions
The ousting of one research program by another, stronger one is a characteristic of whose version of a Kuhnian revolution?
Lakatos
Which philosopher attempts to resolve the conflict between Popper (falsificationist) and Kuhn (paradigm-ist?)
Lakatos
Which philosopher believes that rival research programs can exist side-by-side?
Lakatos
Who argued that Newton created a progressive change in scientific standards, but we do not have a comparison benchmark to compare it to?
Lakatos
Who argued with Kuhn, stating that if paradigms are incommensurable (relative), we do not achieve scientific progress?
Lakatos
Who believed that falsification works for individual statements but not for complex theories, having an issue with Popper?
Lakatos
Who believed that the hardcore was unfalsifiable?
Lakatos
Who combines part of Kuhn's paradigm shifts (dogmatism and conservatism) and Popper's falsificationism (competition and progress)?
Lakatos
Who created 'research programs'?
Lakatos
Who ended up with a criterion for characterizing science that was so lax that few intellectual pursuits could be ruled out?
Lakatos
Who gives a very clear explanation for why scientists often cling to a theory/research program?
Lakatos
Who supported Popper's way of science but realized the difficulties faced by Popper's falsificationism?
Lakatos
Who wanted to modify Popper's falsificationism while rejecting the relativist aspects of Kuhn's paradigms?
Lakatos
Whose ideas give an after-the-fact description and are therefore not a strict normative rule for science?
Lakatos
Whose methodology is strongly based on developments in natural sciences?
Lakatos
who stated that the central problem to the philosophy of science is the problem of stating universal conditions of which a theory is scientific?
Lakatos
Which two philosophers agreed that it needed to be desirable that any theory of science is able to make sense of the history of science?
Lakatos and Kuhn
The notion of no clear guidance concerning which part of a theoretical maze was to be blamed for the apparent falsification (we don't know which part made the theory falsified), was a problem that who had with who?
Lakatos with Popper
Deductive-nomological
Logical deduction of the explanandum due to the use of general laws (nomos=law)
What was the standard view of science up until 1960?
Logical positivism
What is the in-group bias?
May take the form of employing stereotypes to explain the behavior of "outsiders". May also take the form of automatically discounting arguments supporting the opinions of people who are "not one of us"
what are the three bases for argumentation?
Modus ponens, modus tollens (falsification) and verification
Explanandum
Needs to be explained
If we go from "It is freezing" to "NOT it is freezing", what is this an example of?
Negation
E Claim
Negative general claim, so NONE ARE
O Claim
Negative observational claim, so SOME ARE NOT
Are all syllogisms valid?
No
Can verification give certainty? - ex. affirming the consequent fallacy
No! We assume that 'if P then Q' is true and we say 'Q' is true that 'P' has to be also, but that is not the case. (ex. if I drive faster than 30mph, I get a ticket - I get a ticket. Did I drive faster than 30? No! Could have gotten ticket for some other reason)
Does validity have to do with truth?
No, something can be valid if it is not true, and similarly, something can be true but not be valid based on the premises
The tendency to go along with authority even against our better judgement is an example of what?
Obedience to authority
How do you determine the truth or falsity of simple propositions?
Observation
Empiricism idea
Observations (Facts) are the basis for knowledge (Science)
Demarcation
Only science (logical positivist style) can provide 'true' knowledge
Austrian who was based in Berkeley, California for most of his academic career and spent most of his time interacting with and antagonizing Popper and Lakatos
Paul Feyerabend
Published a book where he challenged the attempts to give an account of scientific knowledge that would serve to capture its special status by arguing that there is no such method and that science does not possess features necessary to render it superior to other forms of knowledge
Paul Feyerabend
Imre Lakatos's argument that it is rational to (temporarily) preserve a research program (core) in the face of anomalies is an argument against who?
Popper
Who believed that scientists are always critical and believed we should focus on arguments, or justification?
Popper
Who believed that we should alter the boundaries between science and pseudoscience?
Popper
Who criticized theories such as those of Freud and Marx, claiming that the theories could never go wrong because they were sufficiently flexible to accommodate any instance of human behavior as compatible with their theory?
Popper
Who stated that a theory cannot be falsified in principle does not have empirical content?
Popper
Who stated that scientific theories, by making definite predictions, rule out a range of observable states of affairs in a way that he considered Freudian and Marxist theory failed to do, calling scientific theories falsifiable?
Popper
Who vouches for a replacement of theories with new ones, simply changing the claims with a different set?
Popper
Who give priority to theory or paradigm over observation, and insist on the search for interpretation and acceptance or rejection of the results of observation that takes place against a background theory or paradigm?
Popper and Kuhn
Who proposed rival accounts of science but whose views have in common the ideas against positivist and inductivist accounts of science?
Popper and Kuhn
Who criticized Adlerian psychology, or the idea that human actions are motivated by feelings of inferiority, and how did he do so?
Popper, and he states that it can be defended towards any action, therefore it is unfalsifiable and to a falsificationist, is not a strong scientific theory at all
The context of justification, or the justification of a theory based on observation and logical argumentation is an example of whose way of thinking and what type of science?
Popper, logical positivism
Logical Positivism is based on...
Positivism (Comte) and Empiricism (Berkeley, Hume)
Who believed that science is special because it is derived from the facts, but facts were not sufficiently straightforward for this view because they were too 'theory-dependent' and fallible and because no clear account of how theories can be derived from facts can be found?
Positivists
a conclusion that assumes that if 'A' officered after 'B', then 'B' must have caused 'A' is an example of what?
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (ex. "I drank bottled water and now I'm sick, so the water must have made me sick")
having total disagreement and constant debate over the fundamentals is a characteristic of which phase in Kuhn's science?
Pre-science
Categorical logic can also be called
Predicate logic
Major term in propositional logic/syllogisms
Predicate of the conclusion
What is "begging the question"? (another type of circular reasoning)
Premises assume the truth of the conclusion (ex. "of course smoking causes cancer. The smoke from cigarettes is a carcinogen")
what is a loaded question?
Presenting a question that rests on a questionable or controversial assumption in order to suggest a desired conclusion (ex. "when did you stop cheating on your girlfriend?")
By reformulating "true" to "probably true" or weakening the demand that scientific knowledge should be proven true and resting content with the claim that scientific claims can be shown as probably true in light of evidence, which problem are we trying to fix?
Problems with induction
What is Lakatos's methodology reformulated?
Program is progressive to the extent that it makes natural, as opposed to novel predictions that are confirmed, where 'natural', is confirmed, sensical prediction about the world
"clearly, she shouldn't have done that" is an example of what?
Proof surrogate
Composite propositions
Propositions that are composed out of simpler propositions through the use of logical connectives (ex. John has separation anxiety AND John has an IQ of 110)
Simple propositions
Propositions that cannot be decomposed into simpler propositions (ex. John has an IQ of 110)
Demarcation criterion
Provided by logic and observation, and is true knowledge in all science (unity of science)
Advocated for the 'mechanical philosophy' or the idea that the material world is seen as consisting of pieces of matter (corpuscles of matter, change is rearrangement of corpuscles)
Robert Boyle, 17th century
Truth table
Shoes how the truth of a composite proposition follows from the truth values of the individual propositions
Which side of the paradigm says that young scientists are trained to do good (successful) research?
Sociological side
What is a positive heuristic according to Lakatos's guidelines for work within research programs?
Specifies what scientists should do rather than what they should not do within a program, and gives guidance on how the hard core is to be supplemented and how the resulting protective belt is to be modified in order for a program to yield explanations and predictions of observable phenomena
What is a negative heuristic according to Lakatos's guidelines for work within research programs?
Specifies what the scientist is not supposed to do (ie. modify the hard core of the research program)
Mach's positivism
Start from observable facts. No metaphysics/speculation, no theories/models (things that are not observable are not allowed)
Minor term in propositional logic/syllogisms
Subject of the conclusion
Middle term
Subject that is shared in both premises and does not show up in conclusion
P P If P then P *if A then B is always true* 1 1 1 0 0 1
Tautology
What is rhetoric?
The art of persuasion; uses the psychological (rhetorical) force of expressions to influence the willingness to accept a conclusion
"If...then" proposition states that if A happens, B has to happen as well. If A happens and B does not, then what is the result?
The conclusion is false/not possible based upon the rules of logic
What is irradiation?
The extension of the edges of an illuminated object when seen against a dark background
What, to Lakatos is the worth of a research program defined as?
The extent to which it leads to novel predictions that are confirmed
What is one assumption of a Venn diagram?
There is at least one person or observation in each circle
What does Lakatos believe about the modifications or additions to a protective belt?
They must be independently testable, and scientists are able to modify or augment the belt in any way they chose, given that the changes open up the opportunity for new tests and novel discoveries
Who claimed that we cannot create ideas if the ideas are comparable or fall into the same categories as other ideas?
Thomas Kuhn
Who challenged inductivist and falsificationist accounts of science, believing that traditional accounts of science do not bear comparison with historical evidence, and his account of science attempted to give theory more in keeping with the historical situation as he saw it?
Thomas Kuhn (1970)
What does "1" stand for in a truth table?
True
What is another name for propositional logic?
Truth-functional logic
What is ad populum/bandwagon appeal?
Uses 'group perspective' to persuade (Ex. "if you were really Dutch you would encourage people not to wear a helmet when riding a bicycle")
deductive reasoning is ? if it is impossible for the premise to be false and the conclusion to be true?
Valid
? of a hypothesis is important for logical positivism
Verification
Generality
a lack of specificity
Interested party
a person who stands to gain from our belief in a claim
What is the false consensus effect?
a tendency to assume that attitudes held by us and our peers are held by society at large
causal hypothesis
a tentative claim, a statement offered for further investigation or testing
common variable principle for arriving at a causal hypothesis
a variable common to multiple occurrences of something may by related to its causality
weak analogy
a weak argument based on debatable or unimportant similarities between two or more things
Ambiguity
a word or phrase that could have more than one meaning
Vagueness
a word or phrase wherein it is uncertain what is included or excluded
What is a slippery slope?
accepts events without direct evidence that it will happen (ex. "so you tip him, then you'll be giving him all of your money and before you know it we'll lose the house! Great.")
how are alternative occurences calculated?
add their individual probabilities
incorrectly combining the probability of independent events
adding instead of multiplying the probability of independent events to find their joint probability
What is modus ponens?
affirming the consequent (Verification, aka the first line of the 'if P then Q' table, or 'if P then Q' is accepted, and 'P' is true then 'Q' is also true)
What is a paradigm according to Kuhn?
an accepted world-view, theoretical and practical rules for doing research, reference frame for theories, models, techniques, vocabulary, conventions, organizations, etc., associated with a scientific community
argument from analogy
an argument that something has an attribute because a similar thing has that attribute (ex. Bill is a democrat, therefore his brother Sam is also a democrat)
Lakatos believed that an anomaly in a research program is resolved by what?
an auxiliary hypothesis (searching for things that defend the hard core)
What is innuendo?
an illusive mark or hint, usually a disparaging one
A B A ? B 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
and
What is A in the truth table?
antecedent
statistical syllogism
applies a general statement to a specific case (ex. most teachers are democrats, York is a teacher, therefore York is a democrat)
"everyone does x, therefore it is right to do" is an example of what?
argument from common practice
"everyone believes x, therefore x is true" is an example of what?
argument from popularity
"thinking of doing x is a tradition, therefore it is right to think or do x" is an example of what?
argument from tradition
fallacy of division
assuming that what is true of a whole is also true of its parts (ex. the football team won all of their games making them the best in the league. John is a striker in the football team, therefore, he is the best striker in the league)
fallacy of composition
assuming that what is true of the parts of a thing must be true of the thing itself (ex. the building is built from rectangular bricks; therefore, it must be rectangular)
what is the EV good for?
bets
According to Chalmers, sophisticated falsificationism is the confirmation of ? hypotheses (not falsification) and the falsification or ? hypotheses? (not confirmation)
bold, cautious
Restating the argument rather than proving it is an example of what?
circular argument
->
conditional claim (if...then)
What kind of predictions does a progressive research program lead to?
confirmed novel predictions
What is B in the truth table?
consequent
The negation of a tautology is a ? and the negation of a contradiction is a ?
contradiction, tautology
proof surrogate
defends your proof but actually offers no proof at all (like saying obviously, clearly, everyone knows, etc.)
Precise or stipulative definitions
designed to make a term more precise or to stipulate a new or different meaning from the ordinary one
What is normal science?
development of the defining paradigm, is characterized by a consistent world view or consensus and is determined by the paradigm.
Ethos ads
display a product as being used or endorsed by people we admire or identify with or feel we can trust
otherizing
divides people into two groups, "us" and "them". Portrays the "them" group as suspicious, dangerous or repulsive, the "them" group are usually ideological opponents and other social groups who can be blamed for "our" problems. This decide is closely linked to the fundamental attribution error and in-group bias
What, according to lakatos is 'contrived' defined as in terms of research programs?
does not follow the core of the program
"pornography is a problem, but we must protect free speech" is an example of what?
downplaying
"junk food", "geezer" (makes it sound worse) are examples of what?
dysphemism
Arguments from outrage, pity, envy and apple polishing are examples of what?
emotional appeals
Logos ads
emphasize information about a product that advertisers hope favorably influence our decision to buy the product or service
fostering xenophobia
encouraging the fear or dislike or what is foreign or strange, used to elicit the worst in human nature
"Collateral damage", "sleeping around" (making it sound better) are examples of what?
euphemisms
denying the antecedent
example "if I drive too fast then I receive a ticket" "I did not drive too fast" "I do not receive a ticket" WRONG. You could have received a ticket for a variety of reasons or gotten a ticket for driving slightly too fast.
affirming the consequent
example "if I drive too fast then I receive a ticket" "I receive a ticket" "I was driving too fast" WRONG. You could have received the ticket for a variety of reasons!
confusing contraries and contradictories
failing to notice the two conflicting claims can be either contraries or contradictories
What is modus tollens?
falsification, or the last line of the 'if P then Q' table (so 'if P then Q' is held true, and 'NOT Q' is stated, then we can assume 'NOT P' is true)
Euphemisms/dysphemisms, analogies, innuendo, loaded questions, hyperbole, stereotypes, downplaying, etc. are all examples of what?
forms of rhetoric
Categorical logic (deduction)
gives explanations and predictions
Trying to get us to do or believe something by appealing to our pride of membership is what (ex. we all buy it so you should too!)?
groupthink
The undistributed middle
happens when a speaker or writer assumes that two things related to a third thing are also related to each other (ex. x has features a,b,c y has features a,b,c therefore x is y)
What was Karl Popper's view of science? (ex. positivist, empiricist, etc.)
he was a falsificationist
error margin
how close to the real proportion the sample proportion is likely to be
are error margins large or small for small samples?
huge
is the paired unusual events principle of arriving at a causal hypothesis good for hypothesizing causation or establishing it?
hypothesizing
when is a disjunction false?
if both simpler claims are false
when is a conjunction true?
if both simpler claims are true
paired unusual events principle of arriving at a causal hypothesis
if something unusual happens, look for something else unusual that has happened and consider whether it might be the cause
According to Kuhn, when do anomalies cause a crisis?
if the anomaly goes against the foundations of the paradigm, if many arise and if they are related to important social/economic problems (Ex. wrong calendar, navigation, etc.)
When is a conditional claim false?
if the antecedent is true and consequent is false
truth-functionally equivalent
if two claims have the same truth tables, if the T's and F's in the column under one claim are in the same arrangement as those in the column under the other
What does "if" in the "if and only if" claim introduce?
introduces the antecedent of a conditional
what does the "only if" in the "if and only if" claim introduce?
introduces the consequent of a conditional
What is poisoning the well?
irrelevant information is presented about the person to discredit what he or she will say
What does "valid" in deductive reasoning mean?
it is not possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion to be false
Disinterested party
less suspicious than interested parties, who have no stake in our belief one way or another
how should "unless" be treated in a logic claim?
like or, so same rules as disjunction
What is a weaseler?
linguistic claim for hedging a bet, waters a claim down to protect it from criticism
and, or, if, then
logical connectives
What is a downplayer?
makes it seem like it is not as bad as it is; defends the cause in some way or another
fallacy of amphiboly
makes use of syntactic ambiguity, occurs when the structure of a sentence causes ambiguity
how is the EV calculated?
multiplying the probability of winning by the rewards gained and subtracting this number from the probability of losing multiplied by the potential loss
~P
negation
Was Kuhn able to give a clear answer to the question of whether a paradigm can be superior to the one it replaces?
no, so he had to appeal to the authority of the scientific community
What do workers within a paradigm practice, according to Kuhn?
normal science
Which stage in science says that science consists of 'puzzle solving', where the outline of the puzzle (worldview) is already there but needs to be filled in?
normal science
which stage in science is mainly determined by successful research, which consists of more than explicit rules?
normal science
Fallacy of equivocation
occurs when a sentence contains a word or phrase that is open to more than one interpretation, related to semantic ambiguity
V
or (disjunction)
A B A?B 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
or (inclusive - either this or that or both)
What is the either/or (False dilemma) fallacy?
oversimplifies by reducing it to two sides or choices (ex. "we can either start biking to work or destroy the earth")
What happens during normal science?
paradigm is articulated and developed in the attempt to account for and accommodate relevant aspects of the real world as revealed by the results of experimentation
Trying to get us to do or believe something by appealing to fear of being excluded from the group is an example of what?
peer pressure
Definition by example
pointing to, naming or otherwise identifying one or more examples of the term (ex. fruit- "apple", "banana")
consistency (in reference to a group of beliefs)
possibility that each and every one of them is true at the same time
inconsistency (in reference to a group of beliefs)
possibility that they are not true at the same time
since the paradigm is fixed, there is only one paradigm (more than one to one paradigm) is a change from which stage to which according to Kuhn?
pre-science to normal science
What are novel predictions according to Popper?
predictions that do not figure in or clash with knowledge that is familiar or generally accepted at the time
confusing explanations with excuses
presuming that, because someone is explaining how or why some event came to pass, he or she is attempting to excuse or justify that event
Pathos ads
primarily intended to arouse emotion in us, either positive or negative emotions
According to Kuhn's paradigm, what is then successful?
publish articles, attain grants, get job positions, meet sociological standard of the research field (all defending and helping paradigm grow and continue)
What is the most common method used to ensure that the sample is not biased?
random sample, selected by procedure
Lying to ourselves about the real reasons for believing or doing something is an example of what?
rationalizing
attacking the analogy
rebutting an argument from analogy (showing it is false)
An irrelevancy brought in to "support" a claim or to distract us from the issue is an example of what?
red herring/smokescreen
genetic fallacy
rejecting an idea as false because it came from a defective source
what is argumentum ad hominem?
rejecting some particular person's idea as false because there is something defective about the person
believing that it is wrong to do something but it is not wrong to do it if your society thinks it's okay to do it is an example of what?
relativist fallacy
According to Kuhn, what is normal science?
research under the umbrella of a paradigm, the conventional way of working both theoretically and practically
Lakatos's change from 'new' predictions to 'natural' instead of 'contrived', and his change from resulting from the program itself instead of external means (ad-hoc) is an attempt to what?
resolve the conflict between Popper and Kuhn, improve science
what is the expectation value (EV)?
result of how much you expect to gain combined with your likelihood of gaining it
what type of study occurs when a researcher reasons backwards from a phenomenon of interest to a suspected cause of causal factor. In one group the phenomenon is present, and in the other it is absent and then both groups are checked to see if there is a significant difference in the frequency of the suspected causal agent (weaker than randomized control experiments)
retrospective observational study
Behaviorism versus cognitive psychology, according to Lakatos are examples of what?
rival research programs
The different programs of 1) genetics and 2) upbringing are examples of what?
rival research programs
Initial plausibility
rough assessment of how credible a claim seems to us. Assessment depends on how consistent the claim is with our background information
Trying to scare/threaten us into accepting or doing something is an example of what?
scare tactics, argument from force
Demarcation criterion differentiates between
science and non-science (pseudoscience)
In order to create progress...
scientists must share a similar goal, overlapping ideas, etc. otherwise we would have no way of objectively characterizing science
sampling frame
set of criteria that make it clear for any specific thing whether or not it is a member of the population or the attribute of interest
causal statement
sets forth the cause of some event, uses overlapping vocabulary with arguments
Analytical definition
specifying the features a thing must possess in order for the term being defined to apply to it (dictionary definitions)
Propositional logic (Deduction)
testing hypotheses
What is relativism?
the doctrine that knowledge, truth, and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute
principle of total evidence
the idea that in estimating probabilities of something, you must take into account all available relevant information
What determines the corroboration of a theory?
the number of falsification tests
What is the degree of corroboration of a theory?
the number of falsification tests a theory has survived
what is the empirical content of a theory?
the number of statements that are deducible from the theory which could potentially falsify the theory
emotive meaning/rhetorical force
the power of words or expressions to express and elicit various psychological and emotional responses (often has no probative value)
prior probability
the probability of an event, all things being equal
true population
the real proportion from the population with the attribute of interest
Background knowledge
the sum of our justified beliefs that consists of facts we learn from our own direct observations and facts we learn from others
What is the protective belt according to Lakatos's research programs?
the sum of the additional hypotheses that supplement the hard core, protects hard core from falsification
What was Kuhn's view of anomalies?
they are unsolved puzzles and not considered falsification, but rather seen as a failure of the scientist him/herself
What is the problem with ad-hoc modifications?
they change an idea or add to it in a way that it has no testable consequence that was not already testable in the unmodified theory (are not falsifiable because you cannot repeat the experiment)
fear and hate mongering
they try to stimulate an audience's fear, resentment and hatred in order to prime their attitudes
Connectives and negations are
truth functional operations
demonizing
trying to induce looting of someone or something by portraying the person or thing as evil. Often used with otherizing
contraries
two claims that can never both be true, but can both be false
contradictories
two claims that never have the same truth value
prospective observational study
two groups are compared to the frequency of something- weaker than randomized control experiments and so provides a weaker hypothesis/confirmation
Syllogism
used in propositional logic, and consists of two premises and a conclusion based off of the premises
Persuasive or rhetorical definitions
used to persuade or slant someone's attitude or point of view toward whatever the "defined" term refers to (dangerous because it can distort the true meaning of a word to serve an individual's agenda, and it makes use of emotive meaning and rhetorical devices)
What is semantic ambiguity?
using an ambiguous (not having an obvious meaning) word
what is begging the claim?
what should be proven is not in the statement (skipping proof) ex. 'the widely used and addictive marijuana should be banned to prevent a declining workforce'
covariation principle for arriving at a causal hypothesis
when a variation in one phenomenon is accompanied by a variation in another phenomenon, we have a covariation or correlation
overlooking prior probabilities
when someone fails to consider real probabilities
What constitutes a 'good bet'?
when the EV>0.
gamblers fallacy
when we don't realize that independent events really are independent events
Thinking x is true for no better reason than you want it to be true is an example of what?
wishful thinking (ex. "oh professor, I didn't miss that many classes!")
faulty inductive reasoning
wrongly thinking that, from information of the percentage of A's and B's, you can derive a conclusion about the percentage of B's that are A's.
To Kuhn, is astrology a science, and why?
yes, it is because they made claims that were falsifiable, and while they were falsified, it may be just a side effect of sciences having their problems