PHIL 105 FINAL
10. What is "the basic test" to assess inductive strength? Explain each part in a sentence or two. Can the basic test determine validity?
"The basic test" is when the premises are true, relevant, and unbiased. If an argument has true, relevant, and unbiased premises, that makes the argument strong. If the inductive argument is strong, having a conclusion is highly probable. To determine how probable the conclusion is, depends on the quality and quantity of the evidence given. The strength of the argument is determined based on the evidence that is given. A good inductive argument makes a, "strongly convincing logical case for the conclusion." The basic test cannot determine validity because you can still have valid argument that includes a false premise and a false conclusion.
3. Explain the difference between the aim of using argument to persuade or using it to convince someone of something. How are logic and rhetoric related to these different aims?
A convincing argument gets the listener or reader to agree with the arguer's perspective because he/she sees that it is logically supported by the evidence provided. A persuasive argument gets the listener or reader's compliance ultimately through the use of non-logical or rhetorical means. Logic is related to convincing and rhetoric is related to persuasion. Logic tells us "what follows" while Rhetoric uses language and imagery. Rhetoric tries to stir your emotions and your psychology.
8. Explain fully the main differences between deductive and inductive arguments.
A deductive argument has a formal inference. Whether it follows or not depends on the arrangement or pattern. A deductive argument is valid if the formal inference follows. When a valid argument contains premises that are true, relevant, and unbiased it makes the argument convincing. If a deductive argument is convincing, the conclusion must be true. A good deductive argument makes a fully-convincing logical case for its conclusion. Inductive arguments have empirical inferences. An empirical inference follows to the extent it contains premises that are true, relevant, and unbiased, (T.R.U.), which makes the argument strong. if an inductive argument is strong, its conclusion is more-or-less probable.
11. Explain the general concept of fallacy fully, then distinguish clearly between fallacies that are deductive and fallacies that are inductive. Can the conclusions of fallacies be true?
A fallacy is the idea of which an argument is considered "broken". A deductive fallacy is an invalid deductive argument. Deductive fallacies most often occur as the result of an arguer's misunderstanding or misconstruing some formal logical relationship between the terms in a deductive argument. Inductive fallacies are arguments in which the inference does not follow in a way that provides a convincing logical answer to the question it was intended to resolve because the argument's premises or basic assumptions are untrue, irrelevant, or biased. Conclusions of fallacies can be true, but the premises behind it aren't convincing.
14. Carefully explain what it means to say that an argument is an example of analogical reasoning and explain the two specific criteria for assessing analogies in the fallacy of Apples and Oranges.
Analogical reasoning occurs when someone argues that something is true in one case, and in the other because they are similar. There are two specific criteria for assessing analogies in the fallacy of Apples and Oranges. The two specific criteria are relevance and strength. The more similar two things are, the analogy and argument becomes stronger. There should be lots of thought to decide whether two things are "similar." The premise that asserts the analogy also has to be relevant to the issue the argument is designed to address. It is very easy when we are inclined to trust a speaker or to accept his/her conclusions, to accept irrelevant similarities as if they were relevant and strong.
4. Carefully define "denotation". Then give an original example of a word or phrase and identify at least two of its different denotations.
Denotation is when a word acts like sign to point something out. Words and phrases allow us to denote anything we can talk about. Word and phrases exist to allow us to talk about the things we can denote. For example, the word "house" is where someone one lives. The word "house" is also used to pick out one of the two houses of congress, the "House of Representatives". The House of Representatives are made up of representatives who create and pass laws.
6. Explain what it means for a word or expression to be a euphemism. In what kinds of circumstances are they especially common? How can euphemisms and dysphemisms lead to bias?
Euphemisms/Dysphemisms are defined as "using less-direct words or phrases selected for their connotations." Euphemisms highlight positive aspects of a subject because they have positive connotations behind them, while Dysphemisms are the opposite of Euphemisms. Euphemisms are used to recognize a person's feelings and block out a negative situation or event. Dysphemisms are used to get someone to admit something that might be true even though he/she tried to hide it. In addition, both can be used to hide the truth. Euphemisms and Dysphemisms are one of the three forms of spin and are the most common ways of "spinning" an object. Euphemisms/Dysphemisms can lead to bias because they have positive/negative connotations and can be used to change someone's opinion and steer them away from the truth.
15. Carefully explain what it means to say that an argument is an example of expert reasoning and explain the two specific criteria for assessing expert testimony in the fallacy of Unqualified Expert.
Expert Reasoning is defined as reasoning that is likely to be true because of what follows from an expert's claim based on his or her knowledge. This type of reasoning is mostly done when the information given is complex and the evidence cannot be given directly. An unqualified expert is a type of fallacy where the evidence provided by an expert who is not credible or not independent . Being independent means the expert has no stake or vested interest in something, while being credible means an expert has a real firsthand experience, training, credentials that are up-to-date and relevant to the specific area we have a question about.
1. Explain carefully and in detail how critical reasoning is "an attitude."
It is an attitude characterized by four central aspects. First, it is oriented towards the truth. Second, it maintains a healthy skepticism. Third, is realizing the complexity of the world and that people can disagree reasonably with issues. The final aspect is knowing that not all opinions are created equal. The better opinions are the ones that have more evidence, no bias, and are rational.
7. Explain what jargon and circumlocution are fully and carefully. What are their typical effects?
Jargon is one of the three types of spin and is defined as using specific words that make it difficult for people to understand. Jargon can be used to get the listener to believe that the speaker is an expert in something and that he/she should trust them even though they do not understand what the speaker means. This can put pressure on the listener who pretends to understand what is going on, but has no understanding of what the speaker is saying. Using Jargon the wrong way shows that someone is not confident in their lack of skills or knowledge. Circumlocution is another form of spin and is defined as either using too many or complex words. Circumlocution includes "talking around an issue" and makes what is being talked about sound more complex than what it is. Circumlocution can also be used for stalling time.
5. Define "spin" fully and carefully. Why does spin happen, and why is it dangerous? Why is spin a rhetorical as opposed to a logical concern?
Spin is either an intentional or unintentional form of manipulation used through language. The goal of spin is to try and create a favorable or unfavorable opinion over something. Spin happens because there are an infinite amount of words, phrases, and sentences that can be used to describe a certain topic. Spin can be dangerous because you can be manipulated into believing something that is biased or not true. There are three forms of spin: euphemism/dysphemism, jargon, and circumlocution. Euphemisms makes words and phrases sound good because they have positive connotations behind them. Dysphemisms are the opposite of Euphemisms. Jargon is using specific words that make it difficult for people to understand. The final form of spin is circumlocution. Circumlocution is either using too many or complex words. Spin is rhetorical because it uses imagery, language, and emotions which can steer someone away from the logical meaning.
13. Carefully explain what it means to say that an argument is an example of statistical reasoning, then define "representativeness" and explain how it relates to the fallacy Hasty Generalization.
Statistical reasoning is defined as coming to a basic conclusion of a target based on the occurrences of a sample. When an arguer refers to history, data, experience, or their own knowledge about a certain subject, he/she is using statistical reasoning. "Representativeness", reflects the ability of the sample to speak for the target because it has the same significant characteristics. Hasty Generalizations happen because they are not represented.
2. Carefully explain the logical meaning of the word "bias" and how it is different from the more everyday meaning of the word.
The logical meaning of the word "bias" is defined as a person's opinion being irrational. In critical reasoning, bias does not only refer to a person's opinion, but that the person's opinion is irrationally maintained. An opinion is irrationally maintained because it can ignore, avoid, deny any form of evidence. An everyday bias refers to holding or favor of a particular opinion or perspective. The problem with this definition of everyday bias is that does not reveal why someone sticks to their opinion.
12. How do critical reasoners think about and approach the media regarding issues about which they want to know the truth?
They should seek information from the largest number of the widest range of the most reliable sources and filters available. Then, critical reasoners must carefully analyze what the source is saying. The next step is to find fallacies and spin associated with the source. The sources with fallacies and spin can easily be disregarded. Then the critical reasoner must find out what each source says by thinking carefully and critically.
9. Carefully explain the concept of "validity" and give an original example (one you have made up by yourself!) of a valid argument. Can the conclusions of valid arguments be false?
When a deductive inference gets us to draw a necessary conclusion, it is a valid inference whether the conclusion is true or not. An argument can be valid because the inference follows. A deductive inference is valid if it follows from the arrangement of the argument's premises. A deductive argument is valid if it contains a deductive formal inference that follows. Conclusions of valid arguments can be true if the premises are true and conclusions of valid arguments can be false if one of the premises are also false.