PHL 320 Critical Thinking
psuedoreaosning: two wrongs make a right
"It's o.k. for me to do it to him because if the situation were reversed he would do it to me."
Isolate and discuss the rhetorical devices that appear in the following passage: In March 1997, thirty-nine members of the so-called Heaven's Gate cult committed suicide in Rancho Santa Fe, California. The event was connected with the Hale-Bopp comet, which was at that time making its brightest appearance to observers on earth. The cultists believed a spaceship following the comet would "take them away" from earthly matters, provided they had undergone sufficient "spiritual metamorphosis." A. Weaseler B. Innuendo C. Downplayer D. None of the Above E. All of the Above
"So-called" is a downplayer, used sarcastically here. "Take them away" and "spiritual metamorphosis" may simply be direct quotations from remarks made by the cultists, but they may also be sarcastically intended, in which case they are downplayers.
Example:
"Stacy and Justin are on the brink of divorce. They're always fighting." One could turn this into a valid deductive argument by adding to it the universal statement "Every couple fighting is on the brink of divorce." But such an unqualified universal statement seems unlikely. Probably the speaker wasn't trying to demonstrate that Stacy and Justin are on the brink of divorce. He or she was merely trying to raise its likelihood. He or she was presenting evidence that Stacy and Justin are on the brink of divorce.
post hoc, ergo propter hoc
"after that, therefore because of that"
Syntax (logical connectives) for propositions (logic)
&-ampersand v-wedge/vel ~ tilde --> arrow <--> double arrow parenthesis ( )
A rhetorical device can never be used to express something that is true. (T/F)
(F)
How would you symbolize the statement:If Billy shot the sheriff but he didn't shoot he deputy, then he's guilty of only one crime. But it's not true that he short sheriff but didn't shoot the deputy. Therefore, it's not the case that he's guilty of one crime.
(p & ~q)-->r ~(p & ~q) therefore ~r
How would you symbolize the statement:Either Jay Leno is funny or the show is rugged, or the network has made a bad investment.
(p v q) v r
reliable sources of print media
- Scholarly refereed journal articles - peer review, blind submission, rejection rate, impact factor - Publisher is well known and reputable - Controlled clinical trials are the gold standard in medicine - double blind studies
how does the media keep our interest?
- Selecting the most emotional events and details - Arranging and organising stories - Determining what makes and doesn't make the news
advantages of heuristics
- allow quick decisions - make minimal cognitive demands - often lead to acceptable solutions
In what situation is a conjunction false (or true)?(truth table definition of the connective)
-If just one statement in the conjunction is false, the whole conjunction is false -Only if both conjuncts are true is the whole conjunction true -p & q is true on when p is true and q is true. p & q is false whenever at least one of the component statements is false.
Valid deductive argument.
-If the conclusion of an argument is true by definition given the premise or premises -the way the words "If ... then" and "not" work -You can always turn an inductive argument with an unstated premise into a deductively valid argument by supplying the right universal premise - a statement that something holds without exception or is true everywhere or in all cases
highest standard of proof (common law)
-Is proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." -Arguments connecting the evidence to (or disconnecting it from) the guilt or innocence -Is a lower standard than deductive demonstration -Deductive demonstration corresponds more to what, in ordinary English, might be expressed by the phrase "beyond any possible doubt."
If you've converted an argument into its symbolic form and know all the possible truth values of the argument's variables (statements)--in other words, if you know under what circumstances a statement is true or false due to the influence of the logical connectives, how would this info help us?
-It can help us quickly uncover the validity/invalidity of the whole argument -Given the possible truth values of some statements in the argument, and given the statements' relationships with one another as governed by logical connectives, we could infer the possible truth values of all the other statements. Then we would just need to answer ''Is there a combo of truth values in the argument such that premises are true & the conclusion is false? Is there a counterexample instance?''. If yes, argument is invalid. If there's no such circumstance, argument is valid
Inductive argument
-The premise of a good inductive argument doesn't demonstrate its conclusion; it supports it. -Premise supports the conclusion but does not demonstrate or prove it -support is a matter of degree and that it can vary from just a little to a whole lot - better or worse on a scale, depending on how much support their premises provide for the conclusion -The more support the premise of an inductive argument provides for the conclusion, the stronger the argument; the less support it provides, the weaker the argument
What is the short method of argument evaluation?
-a more efficient technique for calculating validity when arguments have more than 2 or 3 variables -the best strategy for the short method is based on the same fact we relied on in the truth table test: it's impossible for a valid argument to have true premises and a false conclusion -So we try to discover if there's a way to make the conclusion false and the premises true by assigning various truth values to the argument's components. That is, we try to prove that the argument is invalid. If we can do this, then we'll have the proof that we need.
statement (or claim)
-an assertion that something is or is not the case, is or is not actual. It can be either true or false -a sentence that makes a claim--either true or false (has a truth value). -every statement has a truth value. That is, a statement is either true of false. A true statement has a truth value of true and a false statement has a truth value of false -questions/commands don't have truth values
Conditional
-basic form is ''if...then..'' but it can be expressed in other ways than the if-then configuration (/w words like only if, provided, unless, whenever, given p, q/ q given p, assuming that etc.) -symbolized as : p-->q, where the arrow represents the connective -a conditional asserts that if the antecedent is true, then the consequent must be true. (It doesn't assert that the antecedent is actually true or that the consequent is actually true, but only that under specified conditions a certain state of affairs will be actual)
How can we use truth tables to test for validity?
-devising truth tables for arguments can reveal the underlying structure--the form of the argument -the big question is ''Does the truth table show (in any row) a state of affairs in which the premises of an argument are true and the conclusion is false? That is, does the table show any counterexamples'' If we can find even one instance of this arrangement (counterexample), we'll have shown that the argument is invalid.
What part of a conditional (antecedent or consequent) does "only if" introduce? "Unless"? "If"?''If only''?
-if introduces the antecedent; if A then C= A-->C -only if introduced the consequent, A only if C= A-->C -if only introduces the antecedent; C if only A= A-->C -unless introduces the antecedent and also means ''if not'', p unless q=~q-->p / p v q
How many rows are in a two-variable truth table? In a 3-variable table?
-in a 2-variable table there are 4 rows -in a 3-variable table there are 8 rows and thus 8 possible combination of truth values
Why is propositional logic called truth functional logic?
-in propositional logic, the basic unit of concern is statements. Simple statements make up compound statements joined by logical connectives -the truth value of a compound statement is a function of the truth value of component statements. This important fact is the reason why propositional logic is also called truth functional logic
What is the exclusive sense of the word ''or''?
-it can mean ''either but not both'' (This is the exclusive sense) -in this sense, p v q means ''p or q, but not both'' So if P and Q both have truth values of T, then in the exclusive sense P v Q is false.
What is the inclusive sense of the word ''or''?
-it can mean ''one or the other, or both'' -in this sense, p v q means ''p or q, or both'' -standard practice in logic is to assume the inclusive sense when dealing with disjunctions So if P and Q both have truth values of T, then in the inclusive sense P v Q is also true
Critical thinking done on paper is known as...
...an argumentative essay, a type of writing worth mastering, perhaps by following our suggestions (the book's).
Some main types of ambiguity...
...are semantic ambiguity, syntactic ambiguity, grouping ambiguity, and ambiguous pronoun reference.
The most common types of definitions are...
...definition by synonym, definition by example, and analytical definition.
A statement is ambiguous when...
...it is subject to more than one interpretation and it isn't clear which interpretation is the correct one.
A claim is overly general when...
...it lacks sufficient detail to restrict its application to the immediate subject.
The rhetorical use of definitions accomplishes its ends by...
...means of the rhetorical face (emotive meaning) of terms.
Some "definitions" are used not to clarify meaning but...
...to express or influence attitude. This is known as the rhetorical use of definition.
Credibility and the News Media
1) Consideration of Media Ownership -One reason the quality of news available has decreased is that media have become controlled by fewer and fewer corporations 2) Government Management of the News -Opinion and editorial pages and television communications are usually presumed to present the opinions of the s/w's who wrote or spoke in them -But some of those are bought and paid for as well 3) Bias Within the Media -Conservatives are convinced that they have liberal bias; Liberals are convinced that they have conservative bias -Our view is that the major network news organizations are generally credible, Such as ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, The Public Broadcasting System, and National Public Radio -Like the rest of us, people, in the new media sometimes makes mistakes; They sometimes accept claims with insufficient evidence without confirming the credibility of the source -The media are subject to pressure and sometimes to manipulation from the government and other news sources -The media, with few exceptions, are driven in part by the necessity to make a profit, and this can bring pressure from advertisers, owners, and managers 4) Talk Radio -Radio hosts from all sides are given to distortion, misplaced emphasis, and bias with regard to selection of which factors to report 5) Advocacy Television -Good because it exposes people to opinions different from their own -MSNBC=liberal perspective -Fox News=Represents various conservative constituencies 6) The Internet, Generally -The 2 kinds of info sources from the Internet are: a) Consists of commercial and institutional sources b) Consists of individual and group sites on the W Wide Web -Visual attractiveness is NOT credibility -Be wary of recent articles -For web checkers, the most reliable sources are: a) Snopes.com (the original site) b) TruthorFiction.com c) Factcheck.org d) PolitiFact.com e) ConsumerReports.org -Blogs -Are simply journals
Assessing the Content of the Claim
1) Does the Claim Conflict with Our Personal Observations? -Our observations **Provide our MOST RELIABLE SOURCE of info in the world -Our beliefs, hopes, fears, and expectations affect our observations -Our personal interests and biases affect our perceptions and the judgements we base them on -We overlook many negative traits of those we love and vise versa 2) Does the Claim Conflict with our Background Info? -Reports must always be evaluated against our Background Information -When we first encounter claims, we begin by assigning them a certain Initial Plausibility -Read widely, converse freely, and develop an inquiring attitude; there's no substitute for broad, general knowledge
Credibility of Sources
1) Interested Parties -A person who stands to gain from our belief is known as an *Interested Party* -An Interested Party should be viewed with much more suspicion than *Disinterested Parties* 2) Physical and Other Characteristics -These affect a person's credibility -We also tend to use a person's gender, age, ethnicity, accent, and mannerisms, and clothes worn -*Remember: Interested Parties are less reliable than other sources of claims* 3) Expertise -How to judge a person's Expertise: Education and Experience (the two most important) as well as Accomplishments, Reputation, and Position -But aren't always reliable judgements -A claim you accept because it represents the majority viewpoint or comes from the most authorities expert may be thoroughly wrong
14 questions to assess pseudoscience
1. Does the claim lack connectivity with other research? 2. Is the claim based on anecdotal evidence? 3. If it is an extraordinary claim, is it supported by extraordinary evidence? 4. Is the claim falsifiable? 5. Is there an alternative explanation? 6. Is there a more parsimonious explanation? (Occam's Razor) 7. Could the event or relationship have happened by chance? 8. Is a causal relationship being claimed based on correlational data? 9. If causation is claimed, was there a control group or comparison group against which to compare the experimental group? 10. If "the" cause is being claimed, could there actually be multiple causes? 11. Are the findings being generalised based on a small, biased, or unrepresentative sample? 12. Was the claim subjected to peer review? 13. Is the claim replicable? 14. Is the claim expressed in persuasive or biased language?
Steps in understanding an argument (3)
1. Find the conclusion (main point/thesis of passage) 2. Locate the reasons (premises) offered for accepting the conclusion 3) Look for the reasons offered to accept these premises (not just locating but deciding if any of them are useful)
3 steps to Diagram Argument
1. Identify conclusion 2. Identify and number claims 3. circle indicators
What is the best symbolization of the following argument? (c = we care about the environment; p = there will be severe problems down the road; s = our children will suffer.) 1. Unless we care about the environment, then there will be severe problems down the road. 2. If there are severe problems down the road, then our children will suffer. 3. But our children shouldn't suffer. 4. Therefore, we should care about the environment.
1. If not-c, then p 2. If p then s 3. not-s 4. Therefore, c
What are the purpose of definitions?
1. Lexical definitions: as defined in the dictionary. 2. If a word is too vague in a given context. make meaning more precise by stipulating (new or different meanings). Also known as stipulating or precising definitions. 3. Used to persuade (persuasive or rhetorical use): it may distort the real meaning in order to influence someone.
Things to look for in determining if something is an argument (2):
1. Role/intent of speaker: what are they trying to do 2. What is audience prepared to accept/ believe, prior knowledge?
What makes a definition a good one?
1. Should not prejudice the case against one side of a debate or the other. 2. Should be clear.
What is the overall goal of the short method?
=to see if we can prove invalidity in the most efficient way possible. -best strategy for doing this is to look for truth value assignments that cannot be any other way given the truth value assignments in the conclusion.. That is, focus on premises /w assignments that are ''locked into'' the argument by the truth values you've given in the conclusion. Make the assignments in those premises first, regardless of which premise you start with.
What kind of statement is the following: That guy is a loser.
A
What kind of statement is the following: Everyone I know is going to vote for Hillary.
A
Stereotype
A (positive or negative) cultural belief or idea about some group's attributes, usually simplified or exaggerated.
Grouping Ambiguity
A kind of semantic ambiguity in which is is unclear whether a claim refers to a group of things Thames individually or collectively.
A grouping ambiguity is
A kind of semantic ambiguity in which it is unclear whether a claim refers to a group of things taken individually or collectively
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Tricia's dog goes wherever she goes.
All places Tricia goes are places her dog goes.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Banks are the only savings institutions.
All savings institutions are banks
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: The morning star is actually the evening star.
All things identical with the morning star are things identical with the evening star.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: People always leave when Tony plays the accordion.
All times Tony plays the accordion are times people leave.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Only athletes play in the National Basketball Association.
All who play in the National Basketball Association are athletes.
Syntactic Ambiguity
An Ambiguous claim whose ambiguity is due to the structure of the claim.
Semantic Ambiguity
An ambiguous claim whose ambiguity is due to the the ambiguity or a word or phrase in their claim.
Semantic Ambiguity
An ambiguous word, phrase, or sentence whose ambiguity is due to the ambiguity of a word or phrase in the claim. Ex. "Collins, the running back, always lines up on the right side" (ambiguous word is "right" Can make unambiguous by substituting a word or phrase that is not ambiguous (for ex. above, substitute "correct")
What can an argument not have and must have?
An argument can have an unstated premise or an unstated conclusion. However, one must have two stated claims in order to have an argument.
Deductive Argument
An argument intended to prove or demonstrate, rather than merely support, a conclusion.
Which of the following is the best definition of validity?
An argument is valid if and only if the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion.
Validity
An argument is valid if it isn't possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion false.
Valid argument
An argument such that it would be self-contradictory to maintain that the conclusion is false and the premise is true.
Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE)
An argument that concludes that something exists or holds true or is a fact because that supposition best explains something we have observed or otherwise know.
deductive
An argument where the conclusion is found implicitly within the arguments. If the premises are true, the conclusion must follow.
Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE)
An argument whose conclusion explains the cause of something
Anonymous Authority
Anonymous Authority - (also known as: appeal to anonymous authority) Description: When an unspecified source is used as evidence for the claim. This is commonly indicated by phrases such as "They say that...", "It has been said...", "I heard that...", "Studies show...", or generalized groups such as, "scientists say..." When we fail to specify a source of the authority, we can't verify the source, thus the credibility of the argument. Appeals to anonymous sources are more often than not, either a way to fabricate, exaggerate, or misrepresent "facts" in order to deceive others into accepting your claim. At times, this deception is done subconsciously -- it might not always be deliberate. Logical Form: Person 1 once heard that X was true. Therefore, X is true. Example #1: You know, they say that if you swallow gum it takes 7 years to digest. So whatever you do, don't swallow the gum! Explanation: "They" are wrong as "they" usually are. Gum passes through the system relatively unchanged, but does not hang around for 7 years like a college student terrified to get a job. "They" is a common form of appeal to anonymous authority. Example #2: The 13.7 billion year-old universe is a big conspiracy. I read this article once where these notable scientists found strong evidence that the universe was created 6000 years ago, but because of losing their jobs, they were forced to keep quiet! Explanation: Without knowing who these scientists are, or the credibility of the source of the article, we cannot verify the evidence; therefore, we should not accept the evidence. Exception: At times an accepted fact uses the same indicating phrases as the ones used for the fallacy; therefore, if the anonymous authority is actually just a statement of an accepted fact, it should be accepted as evidence. Climate change is happening -- and always has been. Scientists say the earth is certainly in a warming phase, but there is some debate on the exact causes and certainly more debate on what should be done about it politically. Tip: Be very wary of "they".
Appeal To Emotion
Appeal To Emotion - (also known as: playing on emotions, emotional appeal, for the children) Description: This is the general category of many fallacies that use emotion in place of reason in order to attempt to win the argument. It is a type of manipulation used in place of valid logic. There are several specifically emotional fallacies that I list separately in this book, because of their widespread use. However, keep in mind that you can take any emotion, precede it with, "appeal to", and you have created a new fallacy, but by definition, the emotion must be used in place of a valid reason in supporting the conclusion. Logical Form: X must be true. Imagine how sad it would be if it weren't true. Example #1: Power lines cause cancer. I met a little boy with cancer who lived just 20 miles from a power line who looked into my eyes and said, in his weak voice, "Please do whatever you can so that other kids won't have to go through what I am going through." I urge you to vote for this bill to tear down all power lines and replace them with monkeys on treadmills. Explanation: Notice the form of the example: assertion, emotional appeal, request for action (conclusion) -- nowhere is there any evidence presented. We can all tear up over the image of a little boy with cancer who is expressing concern for others rather than taking pity on himself, but that has nothing to do with the assertion or the conclusion.
Appeal to Authority
Appeal to Authority - (also known as: argument from authority, appeal to false authority, argument from false authority, ipse dixit, testimonials [form of]) Definition: Using an authority as evidence in your argument when the authority is not really an authority on the facts relevant to the argument. As the audience, allowing an irrelevant authority to add credibility to the claim being made. Logical Form: According to person 1, Y is true. Therefore, Y is true. Example #1: My 5th grade teacher once told me that girls will go crazy for boys if they learn how to dance. Therefore, if you want to make the ladies go crazy for you, learn to dance. Explanation: Even if the 5th grade teacher were an expert on relationships, her belief about what makes girls "go crazy" for boys is speculative, or perhaps circumstantial, at best. Example #2: The Pope told me that priests can turn bread and wine into Jesus' body and blood. The Pope is not a liar. Therefore, priests really can do this. Explanation: The Pope may believe what he says, and perhaps the Pope is not a liar, but the Pope is not an authority on the fact that the bread and wine are actually transformed into Jesus' body and blood. After all, how much flesh and blood does this guy Jesus actually have to give? Exception: Appealing to authority is valid when the authority is actually a legitimate (debatable) authority on the facts of the argument. In the above example, if Jesus testified that this was actually happening, I guess we'd have to believe him. The above example demonstrates the kind of subtle difference in being an authority on the idea of transubstantiation vs. the actual effectiveness of transubstantiation. Tip: Question authority -- or become the authority that people look to for answers. Variation: Testimonials are statements from, "authorities", in the sense that they are said to know about what they are testifying to. In business, vendor-provided testimonials should not be taken too seriously as they can easily be exceptions to the norm or just made up -- as in, "John G. from Ohio says..."
Appeal to Consequences
Appeal to Consequences - (also known as: appeal to consequences of a belief, argument to the consequences, argument from [the] consequences) Description: Concluding that an idea or proposition is true or false because the consequences of it being true or false are desirable or undesirable. The fallacy lies in the fact that the desirability is not related to the truth value of the idea or proposition. This comes in two forms: the positive and negative. Logical Forms: X is true because if people did not accept X as being true then there would be negative consequences. X is false because if people did not accept X as being false, then there would be negative consequences. X is true because accepting that X is true has positive consequences. X is false because accepting that X is false has positive consequences. Example (positive): If there is objective morality, then good moral behavior will be rewarded after death. I want to be rewarded; therefore, morality must be objective. Example (negative): If there is no objective morality, then all the bad people will not be punished for their bad behavior after death. I don't like that; therefore, morality must be objective. Example (negative): If there is no objective morality, then all the bad people will not be punished for their bad behavior after death. I don't like that; therefore, morality must be objective. Explanation: The fact that one wants to be rewarded, or wants other people to suffer, says nothing to the truth claim of objective morality. These examples are also begging the question that there is life after death. Exception: If it is understood by both parties that an argument is not being made, rather it is a warning based on possibilities, and the person issuing the warning acknowledges it is not evidence for the claim, then there is no fallacy. The problem is virtually every such warning has an implied argument, so it is very debatable what is fallacious or not. Tip: Realize that you can deal with reality, no matter what that reality turns out to be. You don't need to hide from it—face it and embrace it.
Appeal To Force
Appeal to Force - also known as: argument to the cudgel, appeal to the stick, argument by vehemence [form of]) Description: When force, coercion, or even a threat of force is used in place of a reason in an attempt to justify a conclusion. Logical Form: If you don't accept X as true, I will hurt you. Example #1: Melvin: Boss, why do I have to work weekends when nobody else in the company does? Boss: Am I sensing insubordination? I can find another employee very quickly, thanks to Craigslist, you know. Explanation: Melvin has asked a legitimate question to which he did not get a legitimate answer, rather his question was deflected by a threat of force (as being forced out of his job). Example #2: Jordan: Dad, why do I have to spend my summer at Jesus camp? Dad: Because if you don't, you will spend your entire summer in your room with nothing but your Bible! Explanation: Instead of a reason, dad gave Jordan a description of a punishment that would happen. Exception: If the force, coercion, or threat of force is not being used as a reason but as a fact or consequence, then it would not be fallacious, especially when a legitimate reason is given with the "threat", direct or implied. Melvin: Boss, why do I have to wear this goofy-looking hardhat? Boss: It is state law; therefore, company policy. No hat, no job. Tip: Unless you are an indentured servant (slave) or still living with your parents (slave), do not allow others to force you into accepting something as true. Variation: Argument by vehemence is being very loud in place of being right. This is a form of force, or basically frightening your opponent into submission.
Appeal To Pity
Appeal to Pity - (also known as: appeal to sympathy, the Galileo argument [form of]) Description: The attempt to distract from the truth of the conclusion by the use of pity. Logical Form: Person 1 is accused of Y, but person 1 is pathetic. Therefore, Person 1 is innocent. X is true because person 1 worked really hard at making X true. Example #1: I really deserve an "A" on this paper, professor. Not only did I study during my grandmother's funeral, I also passed up the heart transplant surgery, even though that was the first matching donor in 3 years. Explanation: The student deserves an "A" for effort and dedication but, unfortunately, papers are not graded that way. The fact that we should pity her has nothing to do with the quality of the paper written, and if we were to adjust the grade because of the sob stories, we would have fallen victim to the appeal to pity. Example #2: Ginger: Your dog just ran into our house and ransacked our kitchen! Mary: He would never do that, look at how adorable he is with those puppy eyes! Explanation: Being pathetic does not absolve one from his or her crimes, even when it is a puppy. Exception: Like any argument, if it is agreed that logic and reason should take a backseat to emotion, and there is no objective truth claim being made, but rather an opinion of something that should or should not be done, then it could escape the fallacy. Let's not smack Spot for ransacking the neighbor's kitchen—he's just too damn cute! Tip: Avoid pity in argumentation. It is a clear indicator that you have weak evidence for your argument. Variation: The Galileo argument requests pity for unusual claims, like that of Galileo's sun-centered solar system, without providing sufficient evidence for the claims.
A or N/A: Recent surveys for the National Science Foundation report that two of three adult Americans believe that alien spaceships account for UFO reports. It therefore seems likely that several million Americans may have been predisposed to accept the report on NBC's Unsolved Mysteries that the U.S. military recovered a UFO with alien markings.
Argument
E or A: Did Bobbie have a good time last night? Are you kidding? She had a GREAT time! She stayed up all night, she had such a great time.
Argument
E or A: Programs of preferential treatment may seem unfair to white males, but a certain amount of unfairness to individuals can be tolerated for the sake of the common good. therefore, such programs are ethically justified.
Argument
There's a fire, because there's smoke
Argument
E or A: I'm telling him, 'Let's book!' and he's like, 'Relax, dude,' and since it's his wheel, what can I do? That's why we're late, man.
Argument - an argument for justifying why they are late
A or N/A: Fears that chemicals in teething rings and soft plastic toys may cause cancer may be justified. Last week, the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a report confirming that low amounts of DEHP, known to cause liver cancer in lab animals, may be absorbed from certain infant products.
Argument - any time you have the word, "justified," you have an argument
There is trouble in the Middle East, there is a recession under way at home, and all economic indicators are trending downward. It seems likely, then, that the only way the stock market can go is down.
Argument; Conclusion: the stock market can go is down (stock market probably will go down)
Attacking the Person/Ad Hominem
Attacking the Person/ Ad Hominem Definition: The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company he keeps. There are three major forms of Attacking the Person: 1.ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion. 2.ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person's circumstances. 3.ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he preaches. Examples: i.You may argue that God doesn't exist, but you are just following a fad. (ad hominem abusive) ii.We should discount what Premier Klein says about taxation because he won't be hurt by the increase. (ad hominem circumstantial) iii.We should disregard Share B.C.'s argument because they are being funded by the logging industry. (ad hominem circumstantial) iv.You say I shouldn't drink, but you haven't been sober for more than a year. (ad hominem tu quoque) Proof: Identify the attack and show that the character or circumstances of the person has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the proposition being defended.
Begging the Question
Begging the Question (also known as: assuming the initial point, assuming the answer, chicken and the egg argument, circulus in probando, circular reasoning [form of], vicious circle) Description: Any form of argument where the conclusion is assumed in one of the premises. Many people use the phrase "begging the question" incorrectly when they use it to mean, "prompts one to ask the question". That is NOT the correct usage. Begging the question is a form of circular reasoning. Logical Forms: Claim X assumes X is true. Therefore, claim X is true. Example #1: Paranormal activity is real because I have experienced what can only be described as paranormal activity. Explanation: The claim, "paranormal activity is real" is supported by the premise, "I have experienced what can only be described as paranormal activity." The premise presupposes, or assumes, that the claim, "paranormal activity is real" is already true. Example #2: The reason everyone wants the new "Slap Me Silly Elmo" doll is because this is the hottest toy of the season! Explanation: Everyone wanting the toy is the same thing as it being "hot," so the reason given is no reason at all—it is simply rewording the claim and trying to pass it off as support for the claim. Exception: Some assumptions that are universally accepted could pass as not being fallacious. People like to eat because we are biologically influenced to eat.
Biased/Unrepresentative Sample
Biased/Unrepresentative Sample (also known as: biased statistics, loaded sample, prejudiced statistics, prejudiced sample, loaded statistics, biased induction, biased generalization, unrepresentative sample, unrepresentative generalization) Description: Drawing a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is biased, or chosen in order to make it appear the population on average is different than it actually is. This differs from the hasty generalization fallacy, where the biased sample is specifically chosen from a select group, and the small sample is just a random sample, but too small to get any accurate information. Logical Form: Sample S, which is biased, is taken from population P. Conclusion C is drawn about population P based on S. Example #1: Based on a survey of 1000 American homeowners, 99% of those surveyed have two or more automobiles worth on average $100,000 each. Therefore, Americans are very wealthy. Explanation: Where did these homeowners live? Beverly Hills, CA. If the same exact survey was taken in Detroit, the results would be quite different. It is fallacious to accept the conclusion about the American population in general based on not just the geographical sample, but also the fact that homeowners were only surveyed. Example #2: Pastor Pete: People are turning to God everywhere! 9 out of 10 people I interviewed said that they had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Fred: Where did you find these people you interviewed? Pastor Pete: In my church. Explanation: Pastor Pete has drawn a conclusion about religious beliefs from people "everywhere" based on people he has interviewed in his church. That's like concluding that the world likes to dance naked in front of strangers after interviewing a group of strippers. Exception: What exactly is "biased" is subjective, but some biases are very clear. Tip: Be very wary of statistics. Look at the source and details of the studies which produced the statistics. Very often you will find some kind of bias.
Rugby has lots of injuries because rugby players don't wear pads
Causal Explanation
She looks so tired because she hasn't been able to sleep for three nights.
Causal Explanation
The dog's coat is unusually think. No wonder she is hot.
Causal Explanation
The darned engine pings every time I use the regular unleaded gasoline, but it doesn't do it with the super. I'd bet that there is a difference in the octane ratings between the two despite what my mechanic says.
Conclusion: There is a difference in the octane ratings between the two grades of gasoline
"The Justice Department recently reported that the Immigration and Naturalization Service allowed more than 180,000 immigrants to become American citizens just before the last presidential election without completing background checks. The INS did this in hopes that most of the new immigrants would vote for Democrats. This political chicanery is an outrage, and Congress should demand accountability from the responsible officials." Which of the following best states the primary issue discussed in the passage? A. whether the INS allowed 180,000 immigrants to become American citizens without completing background checks B. whether the INS allowed 180,000 immigrants to become American citizens without background checks in hopes that the new immigrants would vote for Democrats C. whether this political chicanery shows that Congress should demand accountability from the responsible officials D. whether Congress should demand accountability from the responsible officials
D. whether Congress should demand accountability from the responsible officials
The following is an example of what type of argument: If it rained, then the streets are wet. it rained. Therefore, the streets are wet.
Deductive
The following is an example of what type of argument: Socrates is a man. All men are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
Deductive
What is the best way to put the following into standard form: the teapot on the stove is whistling
Everything in the class of the teapot on the stove is in the class of things that whistle
Hyperbole
Exaggerating a claim
What Example is this of: Old Gentlemen vs Old Codger
Example of Euphemism
What Example is this of: "UP to five more miles per gallon" or "Lose UP to 10 pounds per week"
Example of Weaseler
A or E? "We need to make clear that sexual preference, whether chosen or genetically determined, is a private matter. It had nothing to do with an individual's ability to make a positive contribution to society."
Explanation
A or E? "What does it take to make a good soap opera? You need good guys and bad guys, sex, babies, passion, infidelity, jealousy, hatred, and suspense. And it must be all believable. Believability is key."
Explanation
E or A: Bill Clinton's popularity goes up and down, up and down. That's because sometimes he says things that make sense, and other times he says things that are totally outrageous.
Explanation
E or A: For a while there, Jazzercise was really popular. But you don't hear much about it anymore. That's probably because rock makes you feel more like moving than jazz. Jazz just makes you feel like moving into another room.
Explanation
E or A: How come light beer has fewer calories than real beer? It has less alcohol, that's why.
Explanation
An argument must have at least two premises.
F
Inductive arguments are sometimes valid and sometimes invalid.
F
Is the following claim true or false? Logic is something very personal. I have my logic and you have yours.
F
Some claims are valid while others are invalid.
F
Some inductive arguments are valid.
F
The best kind of argument from sample is a valid one.
F
The best kinds of arguments are true arguments.
F
The defining feature of a deductive argument is that, when successful, it makes its conclusion more likely.
F
The form of an argument is based on the truth of its premises.
F
An opinion can never be a fact as well. T/F
F opinion
"A because B" is always an argument
False
"A because B" is never an argument
False
"This warranty becomes void if the owner uses the hammer improperly." The part of this statement that is arguably vague is "warranty." True or False?
False
"Tommy has a great fashion sense" - Objective Claim?
False
A belief can't be expressed in a declarative sentence
False
A valid argument cannot have any (BLANK) premises
False
A valid argument cannot have any false premises.
False
A valid argument is one in which all the premises are true.
False
A valid argument with twenty true premises and one false premise is more sound than an argument with three true premises and one false one
False
All unsound arguments are invalid
False
All valid arguments are sound arguments
False
An "interested party" is a person who makes a claim that we have good reason to accept. Most often, the cause of such a person's credibility is his or her knowledge. True or False?
False
An argument can be classified as deductive or inductive based on its ability to persuade others. A. True B. False
False
An argument can have multiple conclusions.
False
An argument requires two things a precept and conclusion.
False
Arguments whose premises are intended to provide some support but less than absolutely conclusive support for the conclusion are deductive.
False
Credibility is an all or nothing proposition; a claim is either credible or it isn't. True or False?
False
No unsound arguments have a false conclusion
False
True or False: Whether a subjective claim is true or not is independent of people's opinions
False
False (or Weak) Analogy
False (or Weak) Analogy (also known as: bad analogy, false analogy, faulty analogy, questionable analogy, argument from spurious similarity, false metaphor) Description: When an analogy is used to prove or disprove an argument, but the analogy is too dissimilar to be effective, that is, it is unlike the argument more than it is like the argument. Logical Form: X is like Y. Y has property P. Therefore, X has property P. (but X really is not too much like Y) Example #1: Not believing in the literal resurrection of Jesus because the Bible has errors and contradictions, is like denying that the Titanic sank because eye-witnesses did not agree if the ship broke in half before or after it sank. Explanation: This is an actual analogy used by, I am sorry to say, one of my favorite Christian debaters (one who usually seems to value reason and logic). There are several problems with this analogy, including: •The Titanic sank in recent history •We know for a fact that the testimonies we have are of eye-witnesses •We have physical evidence of the sunken Titanic Example #2: Believing in the literal resurrection of Jesus is like believing in the literal existence of zombies. Explanation: This is a common analogy used by some atheists who argue against Christianity. It is a weak analogy because: •Jesus was alive not just undead •If God is assumed, then God had a reason to bring Jesus (himself) back—no such reason exists for zombies •Zombies eat brains, Jesus did not (as far as we know) Exception: It is important to note that analogies cannot be "faulty" or "correct", and even calling them "good" or "bad" is not as accurate as referring to them as either "weak" or "strong". The use of an analogy is an argument in itself, the strength of which is very subjective. What is weak to one person, is strong to another. Tip: Analogies are very useful, powerful, and persuasive ways to communicate ideas. Use them -- just make them strong.
Gambler's Fallacy
Gambler's Fallacy (also known as: the Monte Carlo fallacy, the doctrine of the maturity of chances, hot hand fallacy [form of]) Description: Reasoning that, in a situation that is pure random chance, the outcome can be affected by previous outcomes. Example #1: I have flipped heads five times in a row. As a result, the next flip will probably be tails. Explanation: The odds for each and every flip are calculated independently from other flips. The chance for each flip is 50/50, no matter how many times heads came up before. Example #2: Eric: For my lottery numbers, I chose 6, 14, 22, 35, 38, 40. What did you choose? Steve: I chose 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Eric: You idiot! Those numbers will never come up! Explanation: "Common sense" is contrary to logic and probability, when people think that any possible lottery number is more probable than any other. This is because we see meaning in patterns -- but probability doesn't. Because of what is called the clustering illusion, we give the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 special meaning when arranged in that order, random chance is just as likely to produce a 1 as the first number as it is a 6. Now the second number produced is only affected by the first selection in that the first number is no longer a possible choice, but still, the number 2 has the same odds as being selected as 14, and so on. Example #3: Maury: Please put all my chips on red 21. Dealer: Are you sure you want to do that? Red 21 just came up in the last spin. Maury: I didn't know that! Thank you! Put it on black 15 instead. I can't believe I almost made that mistake! Explanation: The dealer (or whatever you call the person spinning the roulette wheel) really should know better -- the fact that red 21 just came up is completely irrelevant to the chances that it will come up again for the next spin. If it did, to us, that would seem "weird," but it is simply the inevitable result of probability. Exception: If you think something is random, but it really isn't -- like a loaded die, then previous outcomes can be used as an indicator of future outcomes. Tip: Gamble for fun, not for the money, and don't wager more than you wouldn't mind losing. Remember, at least as far as casinos go, the odds are against you. Variation: The hot hand fallacy is the irrational belief that if you win or lose several chance games in a row you are either "hot" or "cold", respectively. It is the belief that your "streak" has to do with something other than pure probability. Because we are generally stupid when it comes to realizing this, and pigheaded when it comes to accepting this fact, casinos around the world make a lot of money.
bandwagon effect
Going along with what other people think, even if the beliefs are illogical or irrational.
Please translate the following into standard form: Whenever p happens, q happens.
If p, then q
Which of the following arguments is invalid:
If p, then q not-p Therefore, not-q
What statement below best expresses the following claim: "When people smoke in crowded places, they don't care about the health of those around them."
If people care about the health of those around them, then they don't smoke in crowded places.
What translation below is equivalent to: "She will never be happy if she never cares about other people."
If she is happy, then she cares about other people.
Arguments whose premises are intended to provide some support but less than absolutely conclusive support for the conclusion are
Inductive (Premises provides support but not strong)
What kind of argument is the following? This morning, when I looked at our garden, plant leaves and scraps of vegetables were scattered all around. I bet some rodents got in there last night and ate as much as they could.
Inference to the best explanation
Ridicule/Sarcasm
Insulting or making fun of someone
"abduction."
Intended to show what the cause of something is - type of reasoning as inductive reasoning, reasoning used to support a conclusion
Remember!
Interested parties are less credible than other sources of claims!
Is this valid or not? Whenever she sings, it makes me happy. But I'm definitely not happy now, since she is not singing.
Invalid
The following valid or invalid: If your theory is correct, then light passing Jupiter will be bent. Light passing Jupiter is bent. Therefore, your theory is correct.
Invalid
Moral Relativism...
Is the mistaken view that morality is merely what a society or individual decides; denies that there are any objective moral truths; is a common confusion arising from liberalism, tolerance, and multiculturalism
For the statement "unless people can swim, they are not allowed on the cruise", what do we know about the proposition "they are not allowed on the cruise"?
It is a necessary condition of "people can't swim".
background information
It is only reasonable to be suspicious of any claim that comes into conflict with our ______________________________
If p is Leo sings the blues and q is Fat sings the blues, what distinction is made involving parenthesis? ~q & ~r
Leo does not sing the blues and Fat doesn't not sing the blues -Neither of them sing the blues
Balance of Consideration
Let's go now. I know you want to watch the end of the game, but the score's no even close, and I have to get up at 5. Plus, it's starting to snow, and roads might get slippery.
Which of these sentences is true?
Logic is an academic discipline that studies what makes certain beliefs justified or unjustified. Logic is an academic discipline that studies what makes arguments good or bad. Logic is an academic discipline that studies what makes arguments valid, invalid, sound or unsound. ALL of the above.
Three kinds of ads:
Logos: informational Ethos: product used by people we trust/admire Pathos: emotional reaction
Example of inductive principle to add to an argument
MOST
What is distributed in "Blessed are the Meek"?
Meek
Misleading Vividness
Misleading Vividness Misleading Vividness Description: A small number of dramatic and vivid events are taken to outweigh a significant amount of statistical evidence. Logical Form: Dramatic or vivid event X occurs (does not jibe with the majority of the statistical evidence). Therefore, events of type X are likely to occur. Example #1: In Detroit, there is a 10-year-old living on the street selling drugs to stay alive. In Los Angeles, a 19-year-old prostitute works the streets. America's youth is certainly in serious trouble. Explanation: While the stories of the 10-year-old illegal pharmacist and the 19-year-old village bicycle are certainly disturbing, they are just two specific cases out of tens of millions -- a vast majority of whom live pretty regular lives, far from being considered in any "serious trouble". This is a form of appeal to emotion that causes us to hold irrational beliefs about a population due to a few select cases. The example could have featured two other youths: In Detroit, there is a 10 year-old who plays the piano as beautifully as Beethoven. In Los Angeles, a 19 year-old genius is getting her PhD in nuclear physics. America's youth is certainly something of which we can be proud. Example #2: It was freezing today as it was yesterday. My plants are now dead, and my birdbath turned to solid ice...and it is only October! This global warming thing is a load of crap. Explanation: Whether global warming is a "load of crap" or not, concluding that, by a couple of unusually cold days, is fallacious reasoning at its finest. Exception: If the cases featured are typical of the population in general, then no fallacy is committed. Tip: Don't let your pessimism or optimism cloud your judgments on reality.
If Sheila were ever to become a successful trader, she would have to develop a ruthless personality. But you know her; she could never be ruthless, even for a minute. So it's not going to be in her future to be a successful trader.
Modus tollens
Joel will automatically be accepted provided he got his forms in on time. Unfortunately, he did not get his forms in on time; so he won't be automatically accepted.
Modus tollens
Determine whether the following passage is (or contains) an argument. "The personal computer revolution is marked by accidental discoveries. The entire market for these things was a big surprise to all the pioneers who put simple ads in hobbyist magazines and were stunned by an onslaught of eager customers." —John C. Dvorak a. Argument b. No Argument
No Argument
Determine whether the following passage is (or contains) an argument. Right now there are as many as half a million military-style assault guns in the hands of private citizens in the United States. These small, light, easy-to-handle weapons are exemplified by the Israeli UZI, the American MAC-10 and AR-15, and the KG-99. All of these are sophisticated weapons manufactured for the single purpose of killing human beings in large numbers very quickly. a. Argument b. No Argument
No Argument
No True Scotsman
No True Scotsman also known as: no true Christian*) Description: When a universal ("all", "every", etc.) claim is refuted, rather than conceding the point or meaningfully revising the claim, the claim is altered by going from universal to specific, and failing to give any objective criteria for the specificity. Logical Form: All X are Y. (it is clearly refuted that all X are not Y) Then all true X are Y. Example #1: In 2011, Christian broadcaster, Harold Camping, (once again) predicted the end of the world via Jesus, and managed to get many Christians to join his alarmist campaign. During this time, and especially after the Armageddon date had passed, many Christian groups publicly declared that Camping is not a "true Christian". On a personal note, I think Camping was and is as much of a Christian than any other self-proclaimed Christian and religious/political/ethical beliefs aside, I admire him for having the cojones to make a falsifiable claim about his religious beliefs. Example #2: John: Members of the UbaTuba White Men's Club are upstanding citizens of the community. Marvin: Then why are there so many of these members in jail? John: They were never true UbaTuba White Men's Club members. Marvin: What's a true UbaTuba White Men's Club member? John: Those who don't go to jail. Explanation: This is a very common form of this fallacy that has many variations. Every time one group member denounces another group member for doing or saying something that they don't approve of, usually by the phrase, "he is not really a true [insert membership here]", this fallacy is committed. The universal claim here is that no UbaTuba White Men's Club will ever (universal) go to jail. Marvin points out how clearly this is counterfactual as there are many UbaTuba White Men's Club members in jail. Instead of conceding or meaningfully revising the claim, the implication that no "UbaTuba White Men's Club" is changed to "no true UbaTuba White Men's Club members", which is not meaningful because John's definition of a "true UbaTuba White Men's Club member" apparently can only be demonstrated in the negative if an UbaTuba White Men's Club member goes to jail. This results in the questionable cause fallacy as it is also an unfalsifiable claim, and of course, it commits the no true Scotsman fallacy. Exception: A revised claim going from universal to specific that does give an objective standard would not be fallacious. If this were the case, a false claim would still have been made, but no fallacy would follow.
I think that the wealthy have a moral obligation to help others, and the government is meant to help us live morally. Therefore, it is okay for the government to take some of their wealth to help those who are less fortunate.
No fallacy
Can a single statement be an argument?
No single statement, however long, complex, or controversial, is an argument. Arguments always consist of at least two statements.
Translate "No times that she suggests will work for our meeting".
No times she suggests are times that will work for out meeting.
All of the following except one can be translated into ""All people who can give blood must be people who have been tested". Which one is the exception>
Nobody who's been tested cannot give blood.
Non Sequitur
Non Sequitur (also known as: derailment, "that does not follow", irrelevant reason, invalid inference, non-support, argument by scenario [form of], false premise [form of], questionable premise [form of]) Description: When the conclusion does not follow from the premises. In more informal reasoning, it can be when what is presented as evidence or reason is irrelevant or adds very little support to the conclusion. Logical Form: Claim A is made. Evidence is presented for Claim A. Therefore, claim C is true. Example #1: People generally like to walk on the beach. Beaches have sand. Therefore, having sand floors in homes would be a great idea! Explanation: As cool as the idea of sand floors might sound, the conclusion does not follow from the premises. The fact that people generally like to walk on sand does not mean that they want sand in their homes, just like because people generally like to swim, they shouldn't flood their houses. Example #2: Buddy Burger has the greatest food in town. Buddy Burger was voted #1 by the local paper. Therefore, Phil, the owner of Buddy Burger, should run for President of the United States. Explanation: I bet Phil makes one heck of a burger, but it does not follow that he should be President. Exception: There really is no exceptions to this rule. Any good argument must have a conclusion that follows from the premises. Tip: One of the best ways to expose non sequiturs is by constructing a valid analogy that exposes the absurdity in the argument. Variations: There are many forms of non sequiturs including argument by scenario, where an irrelevant scenario is given in an attempt to support the conclusion. Other forms use different rhetorical devices that are irrelevant to the conclusion.
A or N/A: "Like short-term memory, long-term memory retains information that is encoded in terms of sense modality and in terms of links with information that was learned earlier (that is, meaning)."
Non-argument
A or N/A: Lucy is too short to reach the bottom of the sign.
Non-argument
We need to make clear that sexual preference, whether chosen or genetically determined, is a private matter. It has nothing to do with an individual's ability to make a positive contribution to society.
Not an argument
What does it take to make a good soap opera? You need good guys and bad guys, sex, babies, passion, infidelity, jealousy, hatred, and suspense. And it must all be believable. Believability is key.
Not an argument
What kind of statement is "Some people aren't nice"?
O
My doctor has a degrees and told me to take 1,000 ml of ibuprofen. I'm going to listen to her because she is a doctor.
Obedience to Authority
S or O? "Driving while drowsy is dangerous."
Objective
S or O? "It's more expensive to take a cruise than to lie around on the beach."
Objective
S or O? "Staring at the sun will damage your eyes."
Objective
She believes in reincarnation
Objective Claim
Ambiguous Pronoun References
Occur when it is not clear to what or whom a pronoun is supposed to refer. Ex. "The boys chased the girls and they giggled a lot"
Syntactic ambiguity
Occurs when a claim is open to two or more interpretations because of its structure--that is, its syntax. Ex: "To travel in Canada, you will need a birth certificate or a driver's license and other photo ID." Can have two interpretations: 1. [You will need a birth certificate or a driver's license] and [other photo ID]. 2. [You will need a birth certificate] or [a driver's license and other photo ID]. Can/should be rewritten as: 1a. You will need either a birth certificate or a driver's license and you will also need an additional photo ID. 2a. You will need either a birth certificate or both a driver's license and an additional photo ID.
Syntactic ambiguity
Occurs when a claim is open to two or more interpretations because of its structure-that is, its syntax
Real-life arguments
Often leave a premise unstated. One such unstated premise might make the argument inductive; another might make it deductive. Usually, context or content make reasonably clear what is intended; other times they may not. When they don't, the best practice is to attribute to a speaker an unstated premise that at least is believable, everything considered
Introduce premises
Often occur just after a conclusion has been given (Conclusion)Since ... (Premise) (Conclusion)For ... (Premise) (Conclusion)In view of ... (Premise) (Conclusion)This is implied by ... (Premise)
Advocacy Radio
Positive- exposes people to opinions different then their own Negative- reinforces what the viewer already believes, especially if their is no evidence to support the opinions
Once I started wearing this copper wristband, that bad cough I had went away. The wristband must have somehow made it stop.
Post Hoc Ergo Proper Hoc
Why do you think that President Obama is a good president? -Well, after be became president, I got a good job and found the wife of my dreams, so he sure helped me a lot.
Post Hoc.
An argument consist of two parts which are:
Premise(s) and Conclusion
According to Nature, today's thoroughbred racehorses do not run any faster than their grandparents did. But human Olympic runners are at least 20 percent faster than their counterparts of fifty years ago. Most likely, racehorses have reached their physical limits, but humans have not.
Premise: According to Nature, today's thoroughbred racehorses do not run any faster than their grandparents did Premise: Human Olympic runners are at least 20 percent faster than their counterparts of fifty years ago Conclusion: have reached their physical limits, but humans have not
If the butler had done it, he could not have locked the screen door. Therefore, because the door was locked, we know the butler is in the clear.
Premise: If the butler had done it, he could not have locked the screen door Premise: The screen door was locked Conclusion: The butler is in the clear
If the butler had done it, he could not have locked the screen door. Therefore, because the door was locked, we know the butler is in the clear.
Premise: If the butler had done it, he could not have locked the screen door Premise: The screen door was locked Conclusion: The butler is in the clear
I am sure Marietta comes from a wealthy family. She told me her parents benefited from the cut in the capital gains tax.
Premise: Marietta told me her parents benefited from the cut in the capital gains tax Conclusion: Marietta comes from a wealthy family
Presbyterians are not fundamentalists, but all born-again Christians are. So, no born-again Christians are Presbyterians
Premise: Presbyterians are not fundamentalists Premise: All born-again Christians are fundamentalists Conclusion: No born-again Christians are Presbyterians
The Lakers almost didn't beat the Kings. They'll never get past Dallas.
Premise: The Lakers almost didn't beat the Kings Conclusion: They'll never get past Dallas
Let's see . . . because the clunk comes only when I pedal, the problem must be in the chain, the crank, or the pedals.
Premise: The clunk comes only when I pedal Conclusion: The problem is in the chain, the crank, or the pedals
Mr. Stooler will never make it into the state police. They have a weight limit, and he's over it.
Premise: The state police have a weight limit, and Mr. Stooler is over it Conclusion: Mr. Stooler will never make it into the state police
Mr. Stooler will never make it into the state police. They have a weight limit, and he's over it.
Premise: The state police have a weight limit, and Mr. Stooler is over it Conclusion: Mr. Stooler will never make it into the state police
"There are more injuries in professional football today than there were twenty years ago," he reasoned. "And if there are more injuries, then today's players suffer higher risks. And if they suffer higher risks, then they should be paid more. Consequently, I think today's players should be paid more," he concluded.
Premise: There are more injuries in professional football today than there were twenty years ago Premise: If there are more injuries, then today's prlayes suffer higher risks Premise: If today's players suffer higher risks, they should be paid more Conclusion: They should be paid more
I guess Thork doesn't have a thing to do. Why else would he waste his time watching daytime TV?
Premise: Thork wastes his time watching daytime TV Conclusion: Thork doesn't have a thing to do
Gobbledygook
Pretentious or unintelligible jargon designed as much to obfuscate and confuse as to explain and inform.
Assess the following as probably true, as probably false, as requiring further documentation before judgment, or as a claim that cannot properly be evaluated. Consider both the nature of the claim and the source. Comment from an acquaintance: "I saw Bigfoot with my own eyes! It was huge!" A. Probably True B. Probably False C. Requires Further Documentation D. Cannot Properly be Evaluated
Probably false; observational error is more likely than incorrect background information.
Assess the following as probably true, as probably false, as requiring further documentation before judgment, or as a claim that cannot properly be evaluated. Consider both the nature of the claim and the source. According to Funk & Wagnalls Hammond World Atlas, the three longest rivers in the world are the Nile, the Amazon, and the Yangtze. A. Probably True B. Probably False C. Requires Further Documentation D. Cannot Properly be Evaluated
Probably true; if you can't trust your Funk & Wagnalls in a matter like this, whom can you trust?
premise
Provides reasons for accepting the conclusion
There are puddles everywhere; it must have rained recently.
Rain usually causes puddles.
Red Herring
Red Herring (also known as: beside the point, misdirection [form of], changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, smokescreen, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation, judgmental language [form of]) Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue that to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument. Logical Form: Argument A is presented by person 1. Person 2 introduces argument B. Argument A is abandoned. Example #1: Mike: It is morally wrong to cheat on your spouse, why on earth would you have done that? Ken: But what is morality exactly? Mike: It's a code of conduct shared by cultures. Ken: But who creates this code?... Explanation: Ken has successfully derailed this conversation off of his sexual digressions to the deep, existential, discussion on morality. Example #2: Billy: How could the universe be 6000 years old when we know the speed of light, the distance of astronomical objects (13+ billion light years away), and the fact that the light has reached us[1]? Marty: 6000 years is not a firm number. The universe can be as old as about 10,000 years. Billy: How do you figure that?... Explanation: Marty has succeeded in avoiding the devastating question by introducing a new topic for debate... shifting the young-earth creation timeline where it does not necessarily coincide with the Bible. Exception: Using a red herring to divert attention away from your opponent's red herring, might work, but do two wrongs make a right? Tip: Impress your friends by telling them that there is no such fish species as a "red herring"; rather it refers to a particularly pungent fish—typically a herring but not always—that has been strongly cured in brine and/or heavily smoked. Variation: Using judgmental language is using insulting, compromising or pejorative language to influence the recipient's judgment, and take the attention off the real argument.
Bias within the media
Reportes are usually more liberal while the publishers/owners are more conservative. Main line- Business for Profit. News media are to a great extent a reflection of a society at large.
An argument that contains good premises and structure is called
SOUND. (facts/logic)
Slippery Slope
Slippery Slope- also known as absurd extrapolation, thin edge of the wedge, camel's nose, domino fallacy) Definition: When a relatively insignificant first event is suggested to lead to a more significant event, which in turn leads to a more significant event, and so on, until some ultimate, significant event is reached, where the connection of each event is not only unwarranted, but with each step it becomes more and more improbable. Many events are usually present in this fallacy, but only two are actually required -- usually connected by "the next thing you know..." Logical Form: If A, then B, then C, ... then ultimately Z! Example #1: We cannot unlock our child from the closet because if we do, she will want to roam the house. If we let her roam the house, she will want to roam the neighborhood. If she roams the neighborhood, she will get picked up by a stranger in a van, who will sell her in a sex slavery ring in some other country. Therefore, we should keep her locked up in the closet. Explanation: In this example, it starts out with reasonable effects to the causes. For example, yes, if the child is allowed to go free in her room, she would most likely want to roam the house -- 95% probability estimate[1]. Sure, if she roams the house, she will probably want the freedom of going outside, but not necessarily "roaming the neighborhood", but let's give that a probability of say 10%. Now we start to get very improbable. The chances of her getting picked up by a stranger (.05%) in a van (35%) to sell her into sex slavery (.07%) in another country (40%) is next to nothing when you do all the math: .95 x .10 x .0005 x .35 x .0007 x .4 = about 1 in 25,000,000. Morality and legality aside, is it really worth it to keep a child locked in a closet based on those odds?
I don't think you should drink coffee. If you drink coffee, you get excited. Then, you will do something rash, like running out in the middle of traffic. Then you will die. So just don't drink it.
Slippery slope.
What is the correct symbolization of the following argument? Some students are mean No mean people have friends So, some students don't have friends
Some S are M No M are P So some S are not P
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Not every gambler is a criminal.
Some gamblers are not criminals.
If "No guppies are egg-layers" is false, which of the following must be true?
Some guppies are egg-layers.
In the short method, sometimes a conclusion can be made false in more than one way. In such cases, strategy should be to try each possibility-each way that the conclusion can be false-until you get what you're after: an argument /w true premises and a false conclusion. As soon as you get it, stop. You've proven that the argument form is invalid and there's no reason to continue making assignments. If you try all possibilities and still can't prove invalidity, the argument is valid.
Sometimes a conclusion can be made false in more than one way. In such cases, strategy should be to try each possibility-each way that the conclusion can be false-until you get what you're after: an argument /w true premises and a false conclusion. As soon as you get it, stop. You've proven that the argument form is invalid and there's no reason to continue making assignments. If you try all possibilities and still can't prove invalidity, the argument is valid.
Analytical Definition:
Specifying the features that a thing must possess in order for the term being defined to apply to it. These definitions often take the form of a genus-and-species classification. EX "A mongoose is a ferret-sized mammal native to India that eats snakes and its related to civets.
Analytical definition
Specifying the features that a thing must possess in order for the term being defined to apply to it. These definitions often take the form of a genus-and-species classification. For example, "A samovar is an urn that has a spigot and is used especially in Russia to boil water for tea."
Analytical definition:
Specifying the features that a thing must possess in order for the term being defined to apply to it. These definitions often take the form of a genus-and-species classification. For example, "A samovar is an urn that has a spigot and is used especially in Russia to boil water for tea." "A mongoose is a ferret-sized mammal native to India that eats snakes and is related to civets."
Maude and Clyde are discussing whether to buy this nice little cottage. Using the dropdown menus, classify the fallacies in their conversation (marked in boldface).
Straw Man Circumstantial Ad Hominem Inconsistency ad hominem line-drawing begging the question the misplaced burden of proof line-drawing
Straw Man
Straw Man Description: Substituting a person's actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument. Logical Form: Person 1 makes claim Y. Person 2 restates person 1's claim (in a distorted way). Person 2 attacks the distorted version of the claim. Therefore, claim Y is false. Example #1: Ted: Biological evolution is both a theory and a fact. Edwin: That is ridiculous! How can you possibly be absolutely certain that we evolved from pond scum! Ted: Actually that is a gross misrepresentation of my assertion. I never claimed we evolved from pond scum. Unlike math and logic, science is based on empirical evidence and, therefore, a scientific fact is something that is confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent. The empirical evidence for the fact that biological evolution does occur falls into this category. Explanation: Edwin has ignorantly mischaracterized the argument by a) assuming we evolved from pond scum (whatever that is exactly), and b) assuming "fact" means "certainty". Example #2: Zebedee: What is your view on the Christian God? Mike: I don't believe in any gods, including the Christian one. Zebedee: So you think that we are here by accident, and all this design in nature is pure chance, and the universe just created itself? Mike: You got all that from me stating that I just don't believe in any gods? Explanation: Mike made one claim: that he does not believe in any gods. From that, we can deduce a few things, like he is not a theist, he is not a practicing Christian, Catholic, Jew, or a member of any other religion that requires the belief in a god, but we cannot deduce that he believes we are all here by accident, nature is chance, and the universe created itself. Mike might have no beliefs about these things whatsoever. Perhaps he distinguishes between "accident" and natural selection, perhaps he thinks the concept of design is something we model after the universe, perhaps he has some detailed explanation based on known physics as to how the universe might have first appeared, or perhaps he believes in some other supernatural explanation. Regardless, this was a gross mischaracterization of Mike's argument. Exception: At times, an opponent might not want to expand on the implications of his or her position, so making assumptions might be the only way to get the opponent to point out that your interpretation is not accurate, then they will be forced to clarify.
Style over substance
Style over substance (also known as: argument by slogan [form of], cliché thinking - or thought-terminating cliché, argument by rhyme [form of], argument by poetic language [form of]) Description: When the arguer embellishes the argument with compelling language or rhetoric, and/or visual aesthetics. "If it sounds good or looks good, it must be right!" Logical Form: Person 1 makes claim Y. Claim Y sounds catchy. Therefore, claim Y is true. Example #1: A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Explanation: Most applications of language, like the example above, are not taken literally, but figuratively. However, even figurative language is a way to make an argument. In this case, it might be used to imply that a team is no better than the least productive member of that team which is just not true. Very often the "weakest links" fade away into the background and the strong players lead the team. Example #2: It's not a religion; it is a relationship. Explanation: "Yeah... wow, I can see that!", is the common response to a cliché that diverts critical thought by substitution of poetry, rhyme, or other rhetoric. In fact, these are not arguments, but assertions absent of any evidence or reasons that rely on ones confusion of their emotional connection to language with the truth of the assertion. Tell me why it's not a religion. Tell me what a relationship is exactly. Do not accept information as truth because it sounds nice. Exception: Compelling language or rhetoric can be useful when used, in addition to evidence or strong claims. Tip: Keep in mind that for every poetic saying there is another one with an opposite meaning. They rarely ever make good arguments. Variations: The argument by slogan fallacy is when a slogan (catchy phrase) is taken as truth because it sounds good and we might be used to hearing it, i.e. "Coke is the real thing!" Bumper stickers are great examples of argument by slogan: "Born Again? Excuse me for getting it right the first time." Cliché thinking is the fallacy when sayings like, "leave no stone unturned", are accepted as truth, regardless of the situation -- especially if taken literally. When poetic language is used in an argument as reason or evidence for the truth of the conclusion, the argument by poetic language fallacy is committed. The argument by rhyme uses words that rhyme to make the proposition more attractive. It works... don't ask me how, but it does ("if it doesn't fit, you must acquit"). Rhymes tend to have quite a bit of persuasive power, no matter how false they might be. The best defense against this kind of fallacious rhetoric is a good counter attack using the same fallacy.
A proof of surrogate
Suggests there is evidence or authority for a claim without actually citing such evidence or authority. When someone can't prove or support something, he or she may hint that proof or evidence is available without being specific as to what it is. EX: "STUDIES SHOW".
"If p, then q" and "If not-q, then not-p" are equivalent propositions.
T
A conditional is false if and only if its antecedent is true and its consequent is false.
T
A sound argument is a valid one with true premises.
T
An important aspect of logic is determining what beliefs are justified and what beliefs are not justified
T
Deductive arguments are sometimes valid and sometimes invalid.
T
If a valid argument has a false conclusion, then it must have at least one false premise.
T
If a valid argument has a false conclusion, then not all its premises can be true.
T
If an argument is sound, it must be valid as well.
T
In "p only if q", the variable q stands for a necessary condition.
T
Inductive arguments are always invalid.
T
Sometimes even if no reasons have been given to support a claim, we can still accept the claim without being unjustified. T/F
T
Validity is a property of deductive arguments only.
T
if p, then q = p is sufficient for q.
T
if p, then q = q is necessary for p
T
T
T/F A statement that is the conclusion in one argument could be a premise in another argument
T
T/F A valid argument cannot have true premises and a false conclusion.
F
T/F A valid argument must have at least one true premise.
T
T/F All invalid arguments are unsound
F
T/F All unsound arguments are invalid
T
T/F An invalid argument can have all true premises and a false conclusion
T
T/F An invalid argument can have all true premises and a false conclusion.
F
T/F If a conclusion is false, the argument must be invalid.
F
T/F If a deductive argument has a false conclusion, it must be invalid.
T
T/F If a deductive argument is valid with a false conclusion, one premise is false
F
T/F If all premises are true, the argument must be valid
T
T/F If an argument is sound it cannot have a false conclusion
F
T/F If the conclusion is false, the argument must be invalid
F
T/F It is possible to have a valid argument with all true premises and a false conclusion.
T
T/F No argument is true or false
T
T/F No inductive argument guarantees a true conclusion
belief perseverance
Tendency to cling to our beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Best way to avoid belief perseverance is to "Consider the Opposite"
fundamental attribution error
Tendency to explain someone's behavior based on internal factors, such as personality, and to underestimate the influence that external factors, such as situational influences, have on another person's behavior.
The truth value of a compound statement depends on the truth value of its components. That's why it's a good idea to start out /w guide columns in a truth table., The truth value of these variables (letters) determine the truth values of the statements that are comprised of variables. The truth values of these compound units in turn determine the truth value of any larger compound units
The truth value of a compound statement depends on the truth value of its components. That's why it's a good idea to start out /w guide columns in a truth table., The truth value of these variables (letters) determine the truth values of the statements that are comprised of variables. The truth values of these compound units in turn determine the truth value of any larger compound units
A sound argument is one in which all the premises are true.
True
Identifying premises and conclusions is complicated by the fact that (a) conclusions are sometimes used as premises in another argument and (b) either may be unstated. True or False?
True
In recent years, the social media on the web have become a major source of news. A. True B. False
True
Premises are absent in a piece of true rhetoric. True or False?
True
Sound arguments are always valid.
True
This is a good definition of an argument: A conclusion supported by premises.
True
True or False. A valid argument can have false conclusion.
True
True or False. A valid argument can have false premises and false conclusion and still be valid.
True
True or False. A valid argument must have a true conclusion only if all of the premises are true
True
True or False. An argument can have all true premises and a true conclusion but still be invald
True
True or False. An argument that is sound cannot have false conclusion.
True
True or False. An invalid argument can have false premises and a true conclusion.
True
True or False. An invalid argument can have true conclusion
True
True or False. An invalid argument can have true premises.
True
True or False. If a valid argument has a false conclusion, then at least one premise must be false
True
True or False. If an argument has all true premises and a false conclusion, then it is invalid.
True
True or False. It is possible for an invalid argument to have all true premises and a true conclusion
True
True or False. It's impossible for a valid argument to have true premises and a false conclusion.
True
True or False. The best clues to where to insert parenthesis come from the words: either neither, conjunction and disjunction words such as and/or, and the punctuation of the sentences.
True
True or False. You can have a valid argument with all false premises.
True
True or False. You can have a valid argument with some true premises and some false premises.
True
True or False. You can have an invalid argument with all true premises and a true conclusion.
True
True or False.You can have a valid argument with all false premises and a false conclusion.
True
True or False: "Gina has swag" is a subjective claim
True
True or False: A square has 4 sides in an objective claim
True
balance of considerations reasoning
Trying to determine which considerations, both for and against thinking or doing something, carry the most weight. Example: Should assault weapons be banned? On the one hand, doing that would violate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. But on the other hand, when guns were outlawed in Australia the number of accidental gun deaths fell dramatically; that would probably happen here, too. It is a tough call. The first consideration mentioned in this passage—that banning assault weapons would violate the Second Amendment and therefore should not be done—is a deductive argument. The second consideration mentioned—that banning assault weapons would reduce the number of accidental gun deaths—is an inductive argument.
Vagueness is often intentional
Used as a means to avoid giving a clear, precise answer.
Objective Claim(Fact)
Usually true but may be false; just because something is objective does not mean it is true.
It is impossible for a conclusion to be false if the premises are true; but it IS possible for the premise to be false, and the conclusion to be true, making the argument:
VALID
When is vagueness acceptable?
Vagueness is acceptable in an argument, when the claim is not too vague to convey useful information.
Vagueness vs. Ambiguity
Vagueness: unclear whether something meets definition of term Ambiguity: word/ phrase has more than one meaning
All M are S No M are P So, some S are not P
Valid
All S are M All M are P So, all S are P
Valid
If Jack Davis robbed the Central Pacific Express in 1870, then the authorities imprisoned the right person. But the authorities did not imprison the right person. Therefore, it must have not been Jack Davis who robbed the Central Pacific Express in 1870. is the argument:
Valid
If an argument is sound, it is also:
Valid
If they wanted to go to the party, then they would have called by now. But they haven't, so they didn't. is the argument:
Valid
Is the following valid or invalid? That party will be fun. Whenever there's a live band, it's going to be a good party, and they have a live band.
Valid
Valid or invalid? I'm not going to pass the class. If you pass, you have to study hard, and I'm not studying hard.
Valid
Whether a disjunction is inclusive or exclusive has no effect on our evaluation of disjunctive syllogism. They would be valid regardless of whether the disjunction was construed as inclusive or exclusive. In a disjunction syllogism, if one of the disjuncts is denied, the arguments is valid in any cause. (either p or q. not p. therefore q.) But if one of the disjuncts is affirmed, the argument is invalid when the disjunction is inclusive. If the disjuncts mean ''p or q or both'', then by affirming p we can't conclude not q.
Whether a disjunction is inclusive or exclusive has no effect on our evaluation of disjunctive syllogism. They would be valid regardless of whether the disjunction was construed as inclusive or exclusive. In a disjunction syllogism, if one of the disjuncts is denied, the arguments is valid in any cause. (either p or q. not p. therefore q.) But if one of the disjuncts is affirmed, the argument is invalid when the disjunction is inclusive. If the disjuncts mean ''p or q or both'', then by affirming p we can't conclude not q.
"With genetically different animals, there's always the possibility that the results of experiments are due to variations among animals rather than to whatever is being tested. Genetically identical research animals would therefore be a boon to research because scientists could be more confident of their research results." Which of the following best states the primary issue discussed in the passage?
Whether genetically identical research animals would be a boon to research.
The Republicans' proposal to cut taxes on capital gains (profits from selling real estate, stocks, and bonds) is not a give-away to appease the wealthy. It is a way to stimulate investment and ultimately to create jobs. That's why it is in everyone's interest to support the proposal. (What's the main issue?)
Whether it is in everyone's interest to support the proposal
"The Republicans' proposal to cut taxes on capital gains (profits from selling real estate, stocks, and bonds) is not a sop for the wealthy. It is a way to stimulate investment and ultimately to create jobs. That's why it is in everyone's interest to support the proposal."
Whether it is in everyone's interest to support the proposal.
Main issue: Police brutality does not happen very often. Otherwise, it would not make headlines when it does happen.
Whether police brutality happens often.
Main issue: [Readers] may learn something about their own relationship to the earth from a people who were true conservationists. The Indians knew that life was equated with the earth and its resources, that America was a paradise, and they could not comprehend why the intruders form the East were determined to destroy all that was Indian as well as America itself.
Whether readers may learn something about their own relationship to the earth from a people who were true conservationists
Which of these normally would call for a balance of considerations argument?
Whether swimming is better for you than jogging
Main issue: A lot of people think that the gender of a SC justice doesn't make any difference. But now that there are two women on the bench, I bet we'll get some different results on cases dealing with women's issues during the next few years.
Whether the gender of a SC justice makes a difference
Main issue: The point is that the existence of an independent world explains our experiences better than any known alternative. We thus have good reason to believe that the world - which seems independent of our minds - really is essentially independent of our minds.
Whether we have good reason to believe that the world really is essentially independent of our minds.
Main issue: We have little choice but to concentrate our crime-fighting efforts on enforcement because we don't have any idea what to do about the underlying causes of crime.
Whether we should concentrate our crime-fighting efforts on enforcement.
Main issue: If you're going to buy a computer, you might as well also sign up for some lessons on how to use the thing. After all, no computer ever did any work for its owner under its wonder found out how to make it work.
Whether when you buy a computer you should sign up for lessons.
Is the following argument valid? 1. If p, then (q and r) 2. not-r 3 not-p
Yes
Betty got an A in the course, so she must have received an A on the final.
You can't get an A in a course without having gotten an A on the final.
Colonel Mustard could not have murdered Professor Plum because the two men were in separate rooms when the professor was killed.
You can't murder an individual who isn't in the same room as you when he or she is killed.
Stating your Position on the Issue
Your position on the issue should be clear Try to be brief
If she was still interested in me, she would have called, but she didn't.
[Unstated Conclusion]: She is not still interested in me
interested party
______________ must be viewed with much more suspicion than disinterested parties, who have no stake in our belief one way or another
stipulative definition
a definition that is specific to a particular context
perfectionist fallacy
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer ignores options between "perfection" or "nothing" - version of false dilemna
overlooking a possible common cause
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer overlooks the possibility that two things may both be the effects of a third thing
two wrongs make a right
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer thinks that the wrongfulness of a deed is erased by its being a response to another wrongful deed
false dilemma
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer tries to establish a point by offering it as the only alternative to something we will find unacceptable/unattainable/implausible
scare tactics
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer tries to scare us into accepting an irrelevant conclusion -includes direct threats (sometimes called arguments of force)
begging the question
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer tries to support or "demonstrate" a contention by offering as "evidence" or "proof" what amounts to a repackaging of the very contention in question
genetic fallacy
a fallacy that occurs when the speaker or writer argues that the origin of a contention in and of itself automatically renders it false
wishful thinking
a fallacy that occurs when we forget that wanting something to be true is irrelevant to whether it is true - often confused with rationalizing
"They say Japanese carmakers put out the best cars in the world, all things considered. But that can't be right—the Toyota I bought last year had to be returned to the shop five times!" This is
a hasty generalization.
group-think
a kind of semantic ambiguity in which it is unclear whether a claim refers to a group of things taken individually or collectively
fallacy
a mistake in reasoning, an argument that does not really support or prove the contention it is supposed to support or prove - example: you tell me it is dangerous to text when i am driving, but i have seen you doing it (does not support that texting while driving is dangerous)
Rhetorical Definition
a pseudo definition given to express our feelings or infuence someone else's.
issue
a question
initial plausibility
a rough assessment of how credible a claim seems to us. depends on how consistent the claim is with our background information. there are gradations of believing.
Better-than-average illusion
a self deceptive cognitive bias that leads us to overestimate our own abilities relative to those of others.
argument by anecdote - causal variety
a single story cant establish the presence or absence of causation.
simple statement
a statement that doesn't contain any other statements as constituents
obedience to authority
a tendency to comply with instructions from an authority even if it goes against our better judgement e.g. Milgram study
belief bias
a tendency to draw conclusions based on what one already believes rather than sound logic
Overconfidence Effect
a tendency to overestimate the percentage of correct answers we have given to questions on a subject we are not experts about.
confirmation bias
a tendency to search for information that supports our preconceptions and to ignore or distort contradictory evidence
Slanter: weasler
a word or phrase that qualifies a claim in such a way as to mislead or facilitate deception
dysphemism
a word or phrase used to produce a negative effect on a readers or listeners attitude about something or to minimize the positive associations the thing may have
Slanter: downplayer
a word or short phrase that downplays the significance of one idea in relation to another
Argument Strength
accepting the premises as true would give you good reason to accept the conclusion as true
Emotive Meaning
aka Rhetorical force The positive or negative associations of a word Ex. "Abortion" vs "The murder of an unborn child"
argument from analogy
an argument that something has an attribute because a similar thing that has that attribute
An inference to the best explanation is
an argument whose conclusion explains in the best way the cause of something.
interpretation
an assignment of truth values (T or F) to the atomic components of a compound formula
Slanter: hyperbole
an exaggeration for effect
a ___________ definition specifies the features a thing must have in order for the term being defined to apply to it
analytical
Classify the following: "'Adult beverage' is anything that will get you drunk and make you act like an adolescent."
analytical definition
Classify the following: "A derailleur is that gizmo that shifts gears on a bike."
analytical definition
Classify the following: "Conversation—the enemy of good wine and food."—Alfred Hitchcock
analytical definition
Classify the following: "Fork, n. An instrument used chiefly for the purpose of putting dead animals into the mouth."—Ambrose Bierce
analytical definition
The truth part of evaluating an argument involves
analyzing whether the premises are true
Why do I think that the Republican party has the right answers to America's problems? Because my Math teacher told me, and he is really smart.
appeal to false authority
Greg: I think you should vote against Deval Patrick in the election. Eben: Why do you think that, boss? Greg: Because if you don't, I will fire you. What did Greg do?
appeal to force
Buhler: Blazing Saddles is the best movie of the 20th century? Matthew: Why? Buhler: Because nobody has proven otherwise.
appeal to ignorance
Francis: I think you are having an affair! Mikaela: no I am not! Why would you say that? Francis: until you disprove my claim, I will continue to believe it. What did Francis do?
appeal to ignorance
Mike: President Obama is a Communist, plain and simple. Lydia: How do you know that? Mike: Everybody knows that. Most polls show that 60% of the people asked claim that he's a communist. What did Mike do?
appeal to the majority
Operational Definition
appealing to/using process to explain term - experiment
accident
applying a general statement to a possibly exceptional case. Reverse of hasty generalisation
explanation
argument or explanation? - the price of oil went up last week because OPEC cut back on supply
argument
argument or explanation? - you really do need a root canal because you have an acute tooth abscess
nonargument
argument or nonargument? - everybody is saying the president has made us the laughingstock of the world. what a stupid idea! there is not a bit of truth in that notion
argument
argument or nonargument? - roddick is unlikely to to win the US open this year. he has a nagging leg injury, plus he just does not seem to have the drive he once had
slippery slope
argument that rests on an unsupported assumption that something will progress by degrees to an undesirable outcome
Premise Indicator
conclusionA word or phrase (e.g., "in light of the fact") that ordinarily indicates
The two things related by "and" are called
conjuncts
"Emotive meaning" refers to a term's
connotation
"All human beings have two kidneys. I am a human being. Therefore I have two kidneys." Is this argument deductive or inductive?
deductive
"Sheila's clarinet is French. It's a Leblanc, and all Leblanc instruments are made in France." This argument is best taken as
deductive
Fill in blank: Arguments whose premises are intended to provide absolutely conclusive reasons for accepting the conclusion are __________
deductive
What kind of argument is the following? That animal is a shark. All sharks must live in salt water. So that animal must live in salt water.
deductive argument
What kind of argument is the following? You can either swim or sink. But you aren't sinking. So you must be swimming.
deductive argument
All dogs are mammals and all terriers are mammals. Thus, all terriers are dogs.
deductive, invalid
If Michelangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, then he was familiar with stories from the Old Testament. Michelangelo was familiar with stories from the Old Testament. Therefore, Michelangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
deductive, invalid
Since John loves Nancy and Nancy loves Peter, it follows necessarily that John loves Peter.
deductive, invalid
If inflation heats up, then interest rates will rise. If interest rates rise, then bond prices will decline. Therefore, if inflation heats up, then bond prices will decline.
deductive, valid
Since x+y=15, and x=7, it follows that y=8
deductive, valid
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor happened in either 1941 or 1951. But it didn't happen in 1941. Therefore, it happened in 1951.
deductive, valid
Soundness
deductive, valid argument is sound if it has all true premises
Enumerative Definition
defining by listing all individual members in the term
Ostensive/demonstrative definition
defining by pointing at/out examples of the term
Classify the following: "I may not be able to explain what pornography is, but the magazines on that rack are cases in point."
definition by example
Classify the following: "That stuff up there, see? That's plaque."
definition by example
Classify the following: "The inscription over the door of the administration building is a sample of a gothic script called Fraktur."
definition by example
Classify the following: "When I saw my old crowd at my high school reunion, I suddenly realized what the phrase 'motley crew' really meant."
definition by example
analytical
definition by example, by synonym, or analytical? - "eptistemologist" means a philosopher or other intellectual who studies the nature of knowledge
analytical
definition by example, by synonym, or analytical? - "widow" refers to a woman whose husband has died
analytical
definition by example, by synonym, or analytical? - to philosophers, a realist is a person who believes in the existence of a world outside the mind
Classify the following: "A juice harp is a harmonica."
definition by synonym
Classify the following: "As any crossword puzzler knows, 'sere' means 'arid,' which means dry."
definition by synonym
Classify the following: "Bogey is the same as one over par."
definition by synonym
Classify the following: "Dr. Monfort thinks 'new-age' is another word for mindless."
definition by synonym
Classify the following: "To fledge an arrow is to fletch or feather it."
definition by synonym
Classify the following: "When Dr. Leakey said Lucy's walk was bipedal, he meant her walk was upright."
definition by synonym
fourth group - rhetoric
defintions, explanations, analogies and comparisons
dominance
denial or suppression of one of the conflicting details to see the object as normal
rhetorical definitions
employ rhetorically charged language to express or elicit an attitude about something
Four sources of confusion
excessive vagueness, ambiguity, excessive generality, and undefined terms
hyperbole
extravagant overstatement
hyperbole
extravagant overstatement or exaggeration
inattentional blindness
failure to detect stimuli that are in plain sight when our attention is focused elsewhere
pseudoreasoning
fallacious reasoning where the problem does not involve the form of the argument. Pseudoreasoning often involves a problem of relevance.
Amphiboly and equivocation both make use of syntactic ambiguity. true or false
false
Attempting to establish a point by pretending it is the only alternative to something we will find unacceptable, unattainable, or implausible
false dilemma
all (and only) the rhetorical techniques our textbook specifically identifies as widely used by demagogues.
fear mongering, Fostering xenophobia, Hate-mongering , Demonizing
optimising
finding the best possible solution. using critical thinking instead of heuristics.
initial plausibility
if a claim fits well to one's background information, reasonable degree of ___________________________
George is an 85 year old man. Thus, he probably cannot run a 4 minute marathon.
inductive, strong
Statistics reveal that 86% of those who receive flu shots do not get the flu. Jack received a flu shot a month ago. Therefore, he should be immune, even though the flu is going around now.
inductive, strong
Cogency ( clear, logical, convincing)
inductive, strong argument is Cogent if it has all true premises
After taking LSD, Alice said she saw a flying saucer land in the shopping center parking lot. Since Alice has a reputation for always telling the truth, we must conclude that a flying saucer really did land there.
inductive, weak
Emily has bought over 100 tickets on the weekly state lottery, and she has never won anything. Therefore, the likelihood increases every week that she will win something if she continues to buy tickets.
inductive, weak
When a car breaks down so often that repairs become pointless, the car is thrown on the junk heap. Similarly, when a person becomes old and diseased, he or she should be mercifully put to death.
inductive, weak
When a cook cannot recall the ingredients in a recipe, it is appropriate that she refresh her memory by consulting the recipe book. Similarly, when a student cannot recall the answers during a final exam, it is appropriate that she refresh her memory by consulting the textbook.
inductive, weak
"The ensemble played an encore at last year's concert, and I'm pretty sure they played one the year before as well. So they will most likely play an encore at this year's concert." This argument is best taken as
inductive.
What kind of argument is the following? The thieves broke into the house, but didn't steal anything of value. They were probably looking for information, not valuables.
inference to the best explanation
type of reasoning that compares alternative hypotheses to find the one with the best predictive accuracy. Compares evidence to find the most likely explanation
inference to the best explanation
Is this valid or invalid? p or q p Therefore, not-q
invalid
Some M are S Some M are P So, Some S are P
invalid
a or b b Therefore not-a
invalid
Logos
is an appeal to logic(rational arguments)
Relativism
is the idea that truth is relative to the standards of a given culture. If your culture and some other culture have different standards of truth and evidence, there is no independent "gods eye view" by which one culture's standards can be seen to be more correct than the others.
a (n) _______ is simply a question
issue
Independent Reasoning
it alone gives reason to believe conclusion, doesn't depend on other claims
Although rhetorical force can exert psychological influence,
it has no logical force or probative value.
When a valid argument is true, there is a word for it...
it is SOUND
Nothing counts as an argument unless
it is claimed or intended that one statement follows from one or more other statements in the passage. In other words, a passage is an argument only if the speaker or writer intends to offer evidence or reasons why another statement should be accepted as true.
Major metropolitan newspapers, national magazines and network news are generally credible sources of news but
it is necessary to keep an open mind about what we learn from them
The proposition "if p, then q" is false if and only if:
it is possible for p to be true while q is false
The truth-table test is based on what elementary fact about validity?
it's impossible for a valid argument to have true premises and a false conclusion
recognition
know something is wrong, but doesn't know what
What is generality?
lack of specificity, the more different kinds of X's to which the word "X" applies, the more general it is.
Mira: I think that gay marriage is morally acceptable and should be legal. Ken: Why? Mira: Because the role of the government is to only step in and control individual citizens when they do something that could harm someone else, and preventing a relationship between two consenting adults is not the government's business. What did Mira do?
no fallacy
Robin: I think that Salvador Dali is overrated as an artist. Time and time again, when the Association of Art Historians publish their research on 20th century art, he is found to be far behind other artists who are less well known. What did Robin do?
no fallacy
Tristan: If you get too close to the dog it will bite you, so stay away from it. Sharmane: But I love dogs. Tristan: look, you will get hurt real bad if you get too close. What did Tristan do?
no fallacy
syntactic ambiguity
occurs when a claim is open to two or more interpretations because of its structure - example: plays with beginners' skills may only use court 1 (do not know what the word "only" applies to)
Ambiguous Pronoun References
occurs when it is not clear what or whom a pronoun is supposed to refer.
pseudoreasoning: false dilemma
occurs when one is presented with a dilemma when there are alternatives other than those presented in the horns of the dilemma in question
pseudoreasoning: straw man
occurs when one sets up an exaggerated or distorted version of an opponents argument, one that is easy to knock down
Slanter: innuendo
occurs when one suggests something without coming out and saying it
Slanter: stereotype
occurs when one, either rightly or wrongly, attributes a quality to a group, and then attributes that quality to an individual or individuals within that group
pseudoreasoning: the fallacy of burden of proof
occurs when the burden of proof is inappropriately placed on the wrong party
Slanter: loaded question
occurs when there is an unwarranted assumption inherent in the question
Slanter: horse laugh
occurs when, instead of addressing an individual's claim or argument, one simply ridicules it
two types of ads:
offer reasons to buy it elicit emotional responses
appeal to authority
offering a non authoritative source as evidence
weak analogy
offering an argument based on debatable similarities between two or more things
slippery slope
offering an argument resting on an unsupported warning that something will progress by degrees to an undesirable outcome. can be changed to false dilemma fallacies by rewording
An argument consists of at least
one premise and one conclusion
reasonable opinion
one that agrees with most authoritative opinion but allows for enough open-mindedness to change if the evidence changes
Definition of Example: (also known as?)
ostensive definition: pointing to, naming or otherwise identifying one or more examples of the sort of thing to which the term applies. EX: "By scripture, I mean writings like bible and the Koran.
Which of the following is NOT an appropriate translation of "if p, then q".
p is necessary for q
How would you symbolize the statement: If gods intervene, then neither peace nor war can change the destiny of the nation.
p--> ~(q v r)
___may be used to join variables. ___enable us to symbolize arguments more precisely and avoid confusion.
parenthesis
What is distributed in the following: A penny saved is a penny earned
pennies that are saved
perfectionist fallacy
perfect or nothing - there can be no middle ground. a false dilemma
occupation
person's ______________ bears relationship to his or her knowledge or abilities, but as a guide to moral character or truthfulness, it is less reliable
Rhetoric seeks to:
persuade through the rhetorical force of language and other devices.
When successful, deductive arguments
prove their conclusions.
a deductive argument __________ the conclusion
proves or demonstrates
Balance of Consideration
reasoning typically contains both deductive and inductive elements.
"I wasn't driving recklessly. Please don't give me a ticket." Which term in claim could result in vagueness?
recklessly
relativist fallacy
red herring - most common on earth - any fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer attempts to support or prove a point by bringing up an irrelevant consideration.
relevance fallacies
red herring. premise is not relevant to the issue in question
The red planet is Mars. term defined? definition by example, analytical, or synonym?
red planet, synonym
pseudoreasoning: slippery slope
refusing to take the first step in a progression on unwarranted grounds that doing so will make taking the remaining steps inevitable
In critical thinking, the emphasis falls most heavily on knowing when to
reject, accept, or suspend judgment about a claim
Deductive arguments are secondly judged as being...
sound or unsound. There are two criteria for soundness. First, the argument must be valid. Second, the premises must, in fact, be true. If an argument is deemed sound the conclusion must be true.
Deductive arguments are either
sound or unsound; whether they are one or the other does not depend on whether anyone is persuaded by it.
proof surrogate
suggests there is evidence or authority for a claim without actually citing evidence or authority - example: informed sources say, its obvious that, it is clear...
proof surrogate
suggests there is evidence or authority for a claim without actually citing such evidence or authority. When someone can't prove or support something, he or she may hint that proof or support is available without being specific as to what it is
purpose of good argumentative essay
take a position on an argument and support it with argument
Structure Test for Argument
tests the relationship between premises and conclusion
Inductive arguments seek to show
that if the premises are true then the conclusion is more or less likely
Deductive arguments seek to show
that if the premises are true, the conclusion must follow from these premises.
rhetoric
the art of using language effectively and persuasively
claim
the assertion of a belief, judgment or opinion in a declarative sentence
religious relativism
the belief that what is right and wrong is whatever one's religious culture of society deems it to be
critical thinking
the careful and deliberate determination of whether one should accept, reject, or suspend judgement about a claim
Conclusion
the claim itself
appeal to precedent
the claim that a current case is sufficiently similar to a previous case that should be settled in the same way
offense principle
the claim that an action or activity can justifiably be made illegal if it is sufficiently offensive
harm principle
the claim that the only way to justify a restriction on a persons freedom is to show that the restriction prevents harm to other people
When considering credibility consider both ______ and ________
the claim, its source
Deductive Arguer's Intent
the conclusion is necessary given the premises
Inductive Arguer's Intent
the conclusion is reasonable/probable given the Premises
negation
the denial of a statement, which we can indicate with the word ''not'' or a term that means the same thing. (it is false that..., it is not the case that..., fails to.., it is not true that..'' -symbolized as ~p -a negation reverses the truth value of a statement--changes the statement's truth value to its contradictory. A true statement becomes false; a false statement becomes true. (A double negation is the same thing as no negation since if you negate a negation you end up /w a positive)
To think that what holds true of a group automatically holds true of the individuals in the group is known as
the fallacy of division.
xenophobia
the fear or dislike of what is foreign or strange. demagoguery plays to xenophobic fears and attitudes
consistency principle
the first principle of moral reasoning, which states that, if separate cases aren't different in any relevant way, they should be treated the same way, and if separate cases are treated in the same way, they should not be different in any relevant way. ex: giving two students the same grade even though one did better
memory
the mental capacity to encode, store, and retrieve information, often incomplete, biased and distorted
ethical altruism
the moral doctrine that discounts ones own happiness as being of lesser value than the happiness of others
As Harold is driving down the road from Glenn County to Montclair, he crosses into Salem County and notices that the pavement deteriorates. "I guess they don't keep up their roads very well in this county," he says. The sample in this passage is
the road he's driving on now.
Advertising
the science of arresting the human intelligence long enough to get money from it
availability bias/heuristic
the tendency for people to base their judgments on information that is readily available to them
availabilty heuristic
the tendency to assign higher probability to an event based on how frequently one thinks about it
confirmation bias
the tendency to attach more weight to evidence that supports our view
in-group bias
the tendency to favour our own group and discount supporting arguments for out-groups
negativity bias
the tendency to focus our efforts on picking out negative information or qualities in a person or situation
false consensus effect
the tendency to overestimate the extent to which others share our beliefs and behaviors
false consensus effect
the tendency to overestimate the extent to which others share our beliefs and behaviours.
negativity bias
the tendency to weigh negative information more heavily than positive information
legal paternalism
the theory that a restriction on a persons freedom can sometimes be justified by showing that it is far that persons own benefit
legal moralism
the theory that, if an activity is immoral, it should also be illegal
objective claims
the truth of the claim is independent of whether or not people think it is true
duty ethics / dentogoly
the view that a person should perform an action because it is his or her moral duty to perform it, not because of any consequences that might follow from it
religious absolutism
the view that the correct moral principles are those accepted by the "correct" religion
the conclusion of the argument is also called the ______
thesis
what is the ultimate objective of thinking critically?
to make wise decisions
A definition used to reduce the vagueness of an expression is called a precising definition.true or false?
true
A surprising claim, one that seems to conflict with our background knowledge, requires a more credible source than one that is not surprising in this way.
true
An ad hominem argument illogically conflates a person's personal qualities with those of his or her views.
true
Any definition by example of the word "dog" would also be a definition by example of the word "animal."
true
Any definition by example of the word "dog" would also be a definition by example of the word "animal." true or false?
true
Any definition by example of the word "terrier" would also qualify as a definition by example of the word "canine."
true
Definitions by example, definitions by synonym, and analytical definitions can all be used to evoke an attitude about the thing defined.
true
Gender is an irrelevant feature in judging a person's credibility.
true
If you have reason to believe that an expert is an interested part, you should view the claims they make more suspiciously than those of a disinterested party.
true
If you want to define a word for a person who knows nothing of your language, you're stuck with definitions by example.
true
In recent years, the social media on the web have become a major source of news.
true
It is rarely, if ever, appropriate to insist that a claim be totally free from vagueness.
true
It is rarely, if ever, appropriate to insist that a claim be totally free from vagueness. true or false?
true
T/F The reasons that appear in an argument may be either good or bad reasons---if they are bad reasons, we still have an argument; it's just a bad argument.
true
Vague claims are more difficult to prove false than precise claims.
true
rhetorical definitions are not truly definitions in that they do not provide agreed-upon meanings of words. true or false?
true
Subjective Claim
true only if people think it's true; not independent of what people think
false
true or false? - all arguments are used to try to persuade someone of something
true
true or false? this is an an argumentum ad hominem - not only have i seen you drive and text, but just last week you were saying it is not dangerous to do that
________ are properties of objective propositions like beliefs, opinions, and claims
trust and falsity
background information
trust your ____________________ when considering claims that conflict with that information, but at the same time keep an open mind and realize that further information may cause you to give up a claim you had thought was true
relativism
truth is relative to the standards of a given culture
Besides questioning a source's knowledge, we can also have doubt about a source's
truthfulness
Fear and Hate Mongering
try to stimulate fear, resentment, and hatred.
Demonizing
trying to induce loathing of someone or something by portraying the person or thing as evil
demonising
trying to induce loathing of someone or something by portraying the person or thing as evil.
peer pressure fallacy
trying to make the listener fear being made an outcast.
b
type of ambiguity? - jessica is cold - aunt delia never used glasses a. grouping b. semantic c. syntactic
a
type of ambiguity? - when the head waiter asked whether she had reservations, she said, "yes, but i am going to eat here anyway." a. semantic b. syntactic c. free from ambiguity
lexical definition
type of definition given in a dictionary that tells us universal agreed upon telling us what word ordinarily means
If "Some winters are dry seasons" is true, then the truth value of "Some winters are not dry seasons" is:
undetermined
demagoguery
use extreme rhetoric to propagate false ideas and ridiculous theories
rhetorical explanations
use the language of standard explanations to disguise their real purpose which is to express or elicit an attitude
Loaded Question
used to imply something without coming out and saying it, it rests on one or more unwarranted (unjustified) assumptions.
rhetorical comparison
used to influence beliefs or attitudes through the associations, connotations, implications of words, sentences, and extended passages - may be used to enhance the persuasive force of arguments - do not add to their logical force
dysphemism
used to produce a negative effect on someone's attitude about something, or to tone down the positive associations it may have
Dysphemism
used to produce a negative effect on someone's attitude about something, or to tone down the positive associations it may have.
Argument
used to support statements (claim), provides evidence for a conclusion
innuendo
uses the power of suggestion to disparage (say something bad about someone or something). these rely on neutral (or even positive) phrasing to insinuate something derogatory - example sentence: ladies and gentleman, i am proof that at least one candidate in this race does not make stuff up
Innuendo
uses the power of suggestion to disparage (say something bad about) someone or something. Relies on "neutral or even positive", (rather than negative in dysphemism).
Fostering Xenophobia
using "not from around here", fear or dislike of what is foreign or strange.
If the comet approached within 1 billion miles of the earth, there would have been numerous sightings of it. There weren't numerous sightings. So it did not approach within 1 billion miles. the argument is:
valid
Is the following argument valid or invalid? If you value your feet, you won't mow the lawn in your bare feet. Therefore, since you do mow the lawn in your bare feet, we can conclude that you don't value your feet.
valid
Jim is going to go on a walk or work out today. But he won't go for a walk, since it is raining. So, he'll just work out.
valid
a or b not-b Therefore, a
valid
sound
valid and all true premises
In order to be sound, an argument must be
valid and have true premises.
Deductive arguments are first judged as being...
valid or invalid. A valid deductive argument is one such that if the premises are true then the conclusion must follow from those premises. When this is not the case the argument is said to be invalid. Validity is a matter of the form of the argument.
value judgement vs matters of fact
value judgement - a claim that assesses the merit, desirability, or praiseworthiness of someone or something. matters of fact - describing or giving obvious statement
denial
we forget that wanting something to be false is irrelevant to whether it is false - "I just know it"
reasons for doubting an argument? (3)
weak, irrelevant, invalid
change blindness
when people fail to detect changes to the visual details of a scene. a form of inattentional blindness
self-selection fallacy
when someone generalises incautiously from a self-selected sample (included by their own decision)
overlooking the possibility of random variation
when we ignore the fact that values of variables fluctuate randomly
inductive
when you try to support a conclusion, you are using _________ reasoning
Objective Claim
whether it is true or false, (is independent=regardless) of whether people think it is true or false. (Can be checked if it's true or false).
a
which item best states the primary issue discussed in the passage? - let me tell you why Hank ought to not take that make course. First, it is too hard, and he will probably flunk it. Second, he is going to spend the whole term in a state of frustration. third, he will probably get depressed and do poorly in all the rest of his courses a. whether hank ought to take the math course b. whether hank would flunk the math course c. whether hank will spend the whole term in a state of frustration d. whether hank will get depressed and do poorly in all the rest of his courses
The difference between "deductive reasoning" and "inductive reasoning" is that
with deductive reasoning, we try to demonstrate a conclusion; with inductive reasoning, we try to support a conclusion.
Is the following argument valid? 1. p or q 2. not-p 3 Therefore, q
yes
Is the following argument valid? a or (b and c) not-c Therefore, a
yes
Identify any fallacies in the following passage: "Public restrooms are so unhygienic. Can you prove otherwise?" A. Misplaced Burden of Proof B. Perfectionist Fallacy C. Scare Tactics D. Irrelevant Conclusion E. Poisoning the Well
A. Misplaced Burden of Proof
Example of universal principle to add to an argument
ALL
Cognitive Bias
A psychological factor that unconsciously affects belief formation. It skews our apprehension of reality and interferes with our ability to think clearly, process information accurately and reason objectively.
A claims initial plausibility is assessed by: a. How well the claim fits with one's background information b. One's gut reaction to the claim c. The credibility of the person making the claim d. The first one or two arguments that are made in support of the claim
a. How well the claim fits with one's background information
which of these would most likely affect your recollection of a doctor's appointment? a. fear of appointment b. reputation of hospital c. family's recommendations d. doctor's claims
a. fear of appointment
in which type of argument do the premises support the conclusion: a. inductive b. deductive c. sound d. invalid
a. inductive
An "issue" a. poses a question. b. can only be objective. c. can only be subjective. d. is the same as an opinion.
a. poses a question.
Deciding which car to buy requires thinking; critical thinking, however, involves considering a. whether you have good reasons for choosing a particular car. b. how to finance the car. c. whether you need a car at all. d. whether it would be a more environmentally sound choice to ride a bike.
a. whether you have good reasons for choosing a particular car.
an inference to the best explanation is often called _______
abduction
Validity
accepting that premises as true would force you to accept conclusion as true
credibility of sources
accomplishment, reputation and position is also an important factor
Reasonable Position
agrees with the most authoritative opinion but allows for enough open mindedness to change if the evidence changes
Definition by Example
aka Ostensive definition Pointing to, naming, or otherwise identifying one or more examples of the sort of thing to which the term applies "A mouse is this thing here, the one with the buttons"
Claims made by experts, those with special knowledgeina subject,
are the most reliable, but the claims must pertain to the area of expertise and must not conflict with claims made by other experts in the same area.
an _________ presents a consideration for accepting a claim
argument
Which of the following is not a kind of inductive argument?
argument by expert opinion
What kind of argument is the following? About three-quarters of Italians drink wine with dinner. That guy is italian. So, he probably drinks wine with dinner.
argument from sample
What kind of argument is the following? I have eaten at that restaurant 6 times, and every time the food is horrible. Let's face it, the food is just bad there.
argument from sample
unsound
argument is either invalid or it's valid but has at least 1 false premise
sound argument
argument valid and premises are true
Inductive arguments are secondly judged as...
being cogent or uncogent. There are two criteria for cogency. First, the argument must be strong. Second, the premises must be true. If an argument is deemed cogent the conclusion is probably true.
P is necessary and sufficient for Q. What type of statement is this?
biconditional statement
Which of the following terms is not vague?
binary
compromise
blending the anomalies
background info
body of justified beliefs that consists of facts we learn from our own direct observations and facts we learn from others. Often confirmed by variety of sources.
The proposition "p or q" is false if and only if
both p and q are false
A
Computers will never be able to converse intelligently through speech. A simple example proves that this is so. The sentences "How do you recognize speech?" and "How do you wreck a nice beach?" have entirely different meanings, but they sound similar enough that a computer could not distinguish the two.
Persuasive "definition"
Replacing definitions w/ manipulation - put emotive language in to slant definition and make you think positively/negatively about something
T/F A person should not be considered gullible in accepting the view of the majority of experts in a given subject even if this view turns out later to have been incorrect.
True
T/F Sometimes even if no reasons have been given to support a claim, we can still accept the claim without being unjustified.
True
The application of stare decisis always involves analogical argument.
True
The more support the premise of an inductive argument provides for the conclusion, the stronger the argument. A. True B. False
True
True or False. Valid forms do NOT have counterexamples. INVALID forms DO HAVE counterexamples--that is, it's possible to have premises that are true and conclusion false. (TT/F).
True
True or False. You can have a valid argument that is unsound.
True
True or False: When an opinion is expressed in a declarative statement, the result is a claim
True
True or false. ~q-->p is logically equivalent to p v q
True
We judge deductive arguments in terms of validity and soundness, but we judge inductive ones in terms of strength or weakness. True or False?
True
When an opinion is expressed in a declarative statement the result is a claim
True
Words such as "thus," "therefore," and "consequently" usually indicate that a conclusion is about to be offered. True or False?
True
simply being taller, speaking louder, and being more assertive can often make a person appear more credible. True or False?
True
The reasons that appear in an argument may be either good or bad reasons---if they are bad reasons, we still have an argument; it's just a bad argument.
True (Bad arguments)
An argument is (BLANK) if it isn't possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion false
Valid
Evan went to Delaware. People in Delaware don't go on the road trip. So Evan didn't go on the road trip.
Valid
If the comet approached within 1 billion miles of the earth, there would have been numerous sightings of it. There weren't numerous sightings. So it did not approach within 1 billion miles. the argument is:
Valid
Arguing that the source of a contention in and of itself renders it false
genetic fallacy
Heuristics
general rules we accept without question, including likelihood of events.
Generalising from exceptional cases
generalising from cases that are exceptional or from samples that are biased/skewed, offers an overstated conclusion
hasty generalisation
generalising from too few cases or from samples that are too small
Fallacy of Biased Sample
generalizing from exceptional cases
Governments have been known to
influence and manipulate the news
memories and critical thinking
constructions of memories are altered and subjected to bias. highly dependent on contextual factors.
where there is an unstated premise, you should use the _______ and ______ to clarify if the argument is deductive or inductive
content and context
P-->Q is equivalent to ~Q --> ~P
contraposition
"Everybody likes ice cream" and "nobody likes ice cream" are
contraries
Gal: I think that the Koran is the word of God. Matthew: Really? Why? Gal: Because when I read it prayerfully and with an open heart, I feel the presence of God in my life. What is Gal doing?
no fallacy
Mike: I think that we never went to the moon. It was all fabricated. Lydia: how to you justify that claim? Mike: This is what is says on conspiracytheories.com Lydia: But that website has been discredited many times. Most of its claims are demonstrably false. What is Lydia doing?
no fallacy
"Decaffeinated" means "without caffeine." term defined? definition by example, analytical, or synonym?
decaffeinated, synonym
a belief is said to be propositional, which means it can be expressed in a(n) _______
declarative sentence
small and atypical samples
decrease confidence levels and expand error margin
Physical/Other Characteristics
examples- Eye contact, nervous laugh, perspire? Age, gender, ethnicity, accent & mannerisms. "Con" is short for confidence. Appearance is not a way to judge someones credibility.
To reduce vagueness or eliminate ambiguity,...
or when new or unfamiliar words are brought into play, or familiar words are used in an unusual way, definitions are our best tool.
a definition by example is also called a(n) __________ definition
ostensive
Any analytical definition of the word "dog" would also be an analytical definition of the word "animal."
false
Any definition by synonym of the word "dog" would also be a definition by synonym of the word "animal."
false
Definitions are used only to clarify the meaning of expressions that are not understood.
false
Factual claims put forth by experts about subjects outside their fields are automatically more acceptable than claims put forth by nonexperts.
false
Factual claims that conflict with what we think we know ought to be rejected, but only if we can disprove them through direct observation.
false
If you want to make a word's meaning more precise, a definition by synonym will work better than an analytic definition.
false
If you want to make a word's meaning more precise, a definition by synonym will work better than an analytical definition.
false
It is possible to explain the meaning of the word "thing" by using a definition by example.
false
Not only does effective use of rhetoric have a profound psychological influence, it can also be used to prove or support a claim.
false
Why are you out here on the street protesting? -Well as I see it, you are either against the wealthy or a slave to the wealthy, and I am no damn slave.
false dilemma
line-drawing fallacy
false dilemma. assumes that there is a clear difference or no difference at all. Allows for no imprecision or subjectivity.
What is distributed in the statement "Some baseball players are not fast"?
fast people
The chicken is ready to eat. What type of ambiguity is this?
syntactic
______ ambiguity results when there is a structural problem in a claim
syntactic
"The professor said on Wednesday he would give us a quiz. " This claim is
syntactically ambiguous
cognitive biases
systematic errors in thinking
conjunction fallacy
when people think that two events are more likely to occur together than either individual event
pseudoreasoning: appeal to pity
when pity enters inappropriately into an argument
appeal to ignorance
when someone asserts that we should believe a claim because nobody has proved it false. Proof requires more that an absence of disproof.
Words that usually indicate that a premise has just been offered
thus, therefore, hence, this shows that, this suggests that, consequently, so, accordingly, this implies that, this proves that
Argument is said to be sound
when the premise of a valid argument is true
wishful thinking
when we forget that wanting something to be true doesn't make it true
the reliability of our observations is no better than the reliability of _________
our memory
what grounds do we judge a persons' credibility
physical characteristic (being tall, loud, assertive)
A piano is a stringed instrument in which felt hammers are made to strike the strings by an arrangement of keys and levers. term being defined? definition by example, analytical, or synonym?
piano, analytical
innuendo
power of suggestion to disparage someone or something. Relies on neutral or even positive phrasing to insinuate something derogatory
Emotive Meaning/Rhetorical Force
power to express and elicit various psychological and emotional responses.
Five kinds of passages that are sometimes confused with arguments
reports, supported statements of belief or opinion, illustrations, conditional statements, explanations
rhetoric vs logic
rhetoric is the art of persuasion - logic seeks to establish a conclusion
initial plausibility
rough assessment of how credible a claim seems to us
Initial plausibility
rough assessments that we make of how credible claims seem based on our own background information
subjective claims
usually involve an adjective formed by an opinion
What are rhetorical devices and what else are they called?
usually single words or short phrases designed to give a statement a positive or negative slant. Aka slanters.
Claims of advertisers
vague, ambiguous, misleading, exaggerated, or false. Advertisements never justify purchasing something, written to sell something
Grouping Ambiguity
A kind of semantic ambiguity in which it is unclear whether a claim refers to a group of things taken individually or collectively Ex. "Secretaries make more money than physicians do" (if taken collectively this is true since there are more secretaries than physicians, but untrue if taken individually) Sometimes done intentionally ex. "the biggest tax increase in history"
scientific method
A logical, systematic approach to the solution of a scientific problem
Of course their party was a flop. Didn't you notice all the leftovers?
A lot of leftovers usually means the party was a flop.
critical thinking
A set of cognitive skills that enables us to evaluate and defend truth claims and to make reasonable decisions
Pathos
A speaker can persuade us by connecting with us on a personal level, and by arousing and appealing to our emotions by a skillful use of rhetoric. This mode of persuasion Aristotle termed pathos
Straw Man
A speaker or writer attempts to dismiss a contention by distorting or misrepresenting it.
Ad Hominem
A speaker or writer attempts to dismiss someone's position by discussing the person rather than attacking his or her position.
What kind of argument is the following: "Since most of the people from this region smoke cigarettes, I bet that guy who lives here also smokes."
Argument from Sample
How is an argument distinct from an explanation?
Argument: premises are offered in support of a conclusion Explanation: simply an attempt to tell why something is so
Pornography often depicts women as servants or slaves or as otherwise inferior to men. In light of that, it seems reasonable to expect to find more women than men who are upset by pornography.
Argument; Conclusion: more women that men who are upset by pornography
"Factual claim"
An objective claim. Saying that a claim is "factual" is not the same as say it is true. A factual claim is simply a claim whose truth does not depend on our thinking it is true.
Negativity Bias
An unconscious tendency to give more weight to negative evaluations than positive evaluations.
A(n) ________ definition specifies the features that a thing must possess for the term being defined to apply to it.
Analytical
American Idol may not be having its best season, but when you remember whose careers were launched by American Idol, you know it is the best talent show on TV.
Argument; Conclusion: you know it is the best tl
A or N/A: Computers will never be able to converse intelligently through speech. A simple example proves that this is so. The sentences, "How do you recognize speech?" and "How do you wreck a nice beach?" have entirely different meanings, but they sound similar enough that a computer could not distinguish the two.
Argument
A or N/A: There is trouble in the Middle East, there is a recession under way at home, and all the economic indicators have turned downward. It seems likely, then, that the only way the stock market can go is down.
Argument
responses to perceptual anomalies
- dominance - compromise - disruption - recognition
Lexical/Explanatory Definition
- establishes the agreed-upon understanding of a term - Consensus definition - Dictionary definitions/ agreed upon source of info - Used to decide whether true or false
b
- if properly frosted, people should not notice lumps in a cake a. semantic b. syntactic c. free from ambiguity
Chances are I'll be carded at JJ's because Kera, Sherry, and Bobby were all carded there, and they all look as though they're about thirty.
Premise: Kera, Sherry, and Bobby were all carded at JJ's Premise: They all look as though they're about thirty Conclusion: I'll be carded at JJ's
The Lakers almost didn't beat the Kings. They'll never get past Dallas.
Premise: The Lakers almost didn't beat the Kings Conclusion: They'll never get past Dallas
What is the best way to classify the following argument: 1. If Michael Jordan were president, the United Nations would agree to do whatever America wants. 2. Michael Jordan is the president. 3. Therefore, the United Nations will agree to do whatever America wants.
Valid
Expertise Includes
Both the kind & amount are important factors. Experience is important if it is relevant to the issue at hand
Alexander will finish his book by tomorrow afternoon only if he is an accomplished speed reader. Fortunately for him, he is quite accomplished at speed reading. Therefore, he will get his book finished by tomorrow afternoon. is the argument:
Invalid
Claims without supporting arguments are not convincing. And her claim isn't convincing. So it doesn't have a supporting argument.
Invalid
I think Ken will do well on the exam, since he rarely leaves his room, and people that do well on the exam rarely leave their rooms.
Invalid
If p, then q q Therefore, p This argument is
Invalid
No P is M No S are M So, All S are P
Invalid
Persuasion
Persuasive or rhetorical use of definitions Troublesome since it often distorts the real meaning of a term in order to influence someone either to favor or disfavor a person, policy, object, or event.
disjunction
a compound statement of the form: either p or q (symbolized as p v q) -the word ''unless'' is also sometimes used in place of or to form a disjunction -the word either or neither usually signal the beginning of a disjunction
vagueness
a concept is vague if we cannot say with certainty what it includes and what it excludes
The word "so" introduces
a conclusion.
argument from anecdote (story)
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer tries to support a general claim by offering a story - a form of hasty generalizing (over generalizing)
What is Vagueness?
a matter of not thinking or expressing one's thoughts clearly or precisely.
fallacy
a mistake in reasoning
fallacy-red herring
a mistake in reasoning, an argument that doesn't really support or prove the contention is supposed to support or prove.
Logos
a mode of persuasion, described by Aristotle, that relies on rational argumentation
Ethos
a mode of persuasion, described by Aristotle, that relies on speaker's personal attributes such as reputation, accomplishments, and expertise
Pathos
a mode of persuasion, described by Aristotle, the appeals to the listener's emotions through the skillful use of rhetoric
A surprising claim, one that seems to conflict with our background knowledge, requires
a more credible source than a claim that is not surprising in this way.
rhetorical definition
a pseudo definition given to express our feelings or influence someone elses
Issue
a question that might be disputed, debated, or wondered about, it can be objective or subjective.
loaded question
a question that rests on one or more unwarranted or unjustified assumptions
Premise
a reason for accepting a claim
declarative sentence
a sentence that makes a statement and relies on facts and info
argument
a set of claims, one of which (the conclusion), is supported by the rest (the premises). In an argument, one tries to prove that something is so.
argument
a set of sentences comprised of a premise and a conclusion
claim
a statement that is either true or false
compound statement
a statement that's composed of at least 2 simple statements
stereotypes
a stereotype is a cultural belief or idea about a social group's attributes, usually simplified or exaggerated
truth table
a table that specifies the truth values for claim variables and combinations of claim variables in symbolized statements or arguments -a graphic way of displaying all the truth value possibilities of statements/arguments
obedience to authority
a tendency to comply with instructions from an authority
Attempting to dismiss a source's position by discussing the source rather than the position
ad hominem in general
what pressures does the media face?
advertisers, owners and managers, government, other news sources
in-group bias
tendency to favor individuals within our group over those from outside our group
Rhetorical Explanation
an explanation intended to disguise their real purpose and influence attitudes or affect behavior
proof surrogate
an expression used to suggest that there is evidence or authority for a claim without actually saying what it is
What is connotation?
an idea or feeling that a word invokes in addition to its literal or primary meaning. EX: discipline, has unhappy connotations of punishment.
innvendo
an insinuation of something deragatory
Rhetorical Analogy
analogies used to express or influence attitudes or affect behavior by invoking images with emotional associations.
critical thinking skills
analysing, reasoning, evaluating, decision making, problem solving
How do you know that Dell makes the best computers? -Nobody has shown me otherwise.
appeal to ignorance
explanation
argument or explanation? - my toe hurts because i stubbed it
explanation
argument or explanation? - she won the lottery because she is lucky
inductive
arguments that are relatively strong or weak are called __________ arugments
credibility
believibility - occurs at differing degrees, requires sound judgement and background knowledge
be wary of using language referring to certain groups categorized by ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation etc. if unnecessary or irrelevant because
can be perceived as a bias, or make info inaccurate
2 arenas in which we assess credibility
claims' sources
main characteristic of good ostensive/example definition
clarity
The purpose of critical thinking is to
come to correct conclusions.
fallacy of biased sample
conclusion drawn from a biased or skewed sample
Objective Dispute
the answer exists and has nothing to do with our opinion (facts)
Subjective Dispute
the answer is a matter of personal opinion or has no outside answer (opinions)
A term is vague if
the application of the term has borderline cases
rhetorical force
the emotive meaning associated with words and expressions and their power to express and elicit various psychological and emotional responses
hindsight bias
the tendency to believe, after learning an outcome, that one would have foreseen it
Subclass Definition
defining by listing types of things making up the term => can be opened or closed, list individuals or types
Classify the following: "Tenor applies to vocal ranges like Pavarotti's."
definition by example
definition by example
definition by example, by synonym, or analytical? - "freedom" is just another word for nothing left to lose
Otherizing
divides people into two groups--us and them and portrays them as suspicious, dangerous.
To think that what holds true of a group automatically holds true of the individuals in the group is known as the fallacy of
division
"The ensemble played an encore at last year's concert, and I'm pretty sure they played one the year before as well. So they will most likely play an encore at this year's concert." This argument is best taken as
inductive
The idea that black people in this country live in poverty is ridiculous. Look at Oprah Winfrey. She's a millionaire. And so are Michael Jordan and Beyonce.
inductive, weak
There are more churches in NYC than any other city in the nation, and more crimes in NYC than anywhere else. So, if we are to eliminate crime, we must abolish the churches.
inductive, weak
Pathos
is an appeal to emotion
repetition
making the same point over and over. The constant repetition of a theme seems eventually to having a dulling effect on our critical faculties, and we can become lulled into believing something simply because we have become used to hearing it - attributable to the availability heuristic.
P-->Q is equivalent to ~P v Q
material implication
heuristics
mental shortcuts designed to achieve a certain result
bandwagon fallacy
mentioning the popularity of a proposition to encourage others to believe it. "everyone thinks" etc. Can also be classified as an appeal to emotion.
wishful thinking
occurs when we forget that wanting something to be true is irrelevant to whether it is true
loaded question
often beg the question. Assuming the belief in the phrasing of the question.
The premises of a good deductive argument, if true,
proves or demonstrates its conclusion.
irrelevant conclusion
relevance fallacies that do not fit into the previous categories
__________ ambiguity arises when a word or phrase has more than one meaning
semantic
"The team was upset." This claim is
semantically ambiguous.
mistaken appeal to popularity
treating an issue that cannot be settled by public opinion as if it could be
Which of the following term is not vague?
triangular
guilt by association
tries to persuade us to dismiss a belief by telling us that someone we don't like has that belief. Taints the idea by associating it with people he or she thinks listeners don't like or trust. Associated with negatively stereotyped people.
scare tactics
tries to scare us into accepting an irrelevant conclusion
"Earth is larger in size than Jupiter". even though this statement is false, it is still an objective opinion. True or false?
true
Objective Claim
true or false regardless of whether people think it's true or false; independent of what you think
Fill in blank: An argument is ___ if it isn't possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion false
valid
What determines logical strength?
An argument's form
True or False: "Tommy has a great fashion sense" is an objective claim.
False
Fundamental Attribution Error
"Anyone who's unemployed hasn't looked hard enough, or there's something wrong with them."
Examples of Objective Claims
"God Exists" or "There is life on Mars"
Psychographicology
"face-reading". A persons facial features reveal the whole picture of a persons needs and abilities
Utilitarianism holds the idea that what is right and wrong is merely a matter of subjective opinion.
False
Virtue ethics is an abstruse ethical theory.
False
2 categories of doubting a source:
1. knowledge and expertise 2. objectivity and accuracy
ways to judge a person's expertise (5)
1.education 2. experience 3. accomplishments 4. reputation 5. positions
credibility of sources
2. doubt the person's truthfulness, objectivity or accuracy
What kind of a proposition is "A well-fed person is a happy person"?
A
Truth
A claim is true if it is free from error
Issue
A question
What makes a claim subjective is that it can't be supported by reasons. True or False?
False
Advertising assaults us at every turn, attempting to sell us goods, services, beliefs and attitudes.
Advertisers are always more concerned with selling you something than with improving your life. They are concerned with improving their own lives.
It's true, Ms. Zerkle will be accepted into law school only if she has excellent grades. But I'm telling you, you should see her transcript; she's made straight A's for the past two years. So don't worry about her getting into law school. She'll be accepted without a doubt.
Affirming the consequent
Jamal is a devout Muslim only if he follows the Sharia law, and I know for a fact that he follows it to the letter. So he is a devout Muslim.
Affirming the consequent
Whether a subjective claim is true or not is independent of people's opinions
False
What version below is the best way to render "Amazon warriors are fierce" in standard form?
All Amazon warriors are fierce warriors
What is the contradictory of "some S are not P".
All S are P.
Anything that's an alligator is a reptile.
All alligators are reptiles.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Exceptional employees are always rewarded.
All exceptional employees are recipients of rewards.
If "Some frozen dinners are nutritious meals" is false, which of the following must also be false?
All frozen dinner are nutritious meals
Which of the following is not a standard-form categorical claim?
All human beings are mortal.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: The only organic products are chemical-free products.
All organic products are chemical-free products.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Except for members of the Lucero family, there's nobody in the park.
All people in the park are members of the Lucero family.
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: People can't register unless they pay the fee.
All people who can register are people who pay the fee.
A or E? "Pornography often depicts women as servants or slaves or as otherwise inferior to men. In light of that, it seems reasonable to expect to find more women than men who are upset by pornography."
Argument
A or E? "There is trouble in the middle east, there is a recession under way at home, and all economic indicators are trending downward. It seems likely, then, that the only way the stock market can go is down. "
Argument
Which of the following claim is false?
Any claim can be translated into A, E, I, or O.
Blogs
Anyone can post anything, not reliable for information as a source
Jamal keeps his word, so he is a man of good character.
Anyone who keeps his or her word is a person of good character.
Avril is a conservative because she voted against gun control.
Anyone who votes against gun control is a conservative.
Wife: Don't you agree that my hair looks nice like this? (If you disagree, you will find yourself divorced). Husband: Yep, looks great.
Appeal to force
The president is a crook. -Why do you say that? Well, nobody has proven otherwise.
Appeal to ignorance
You should buy your books from Amazon.com. -Why? Because most people do it.
Appeal to the Majority
two wrongs make a right
Arguing that your doing something morally wrong is justified because someone else has done the same (or similar) thing.
A or E? "American Idol may not be having its best season, but when you remember whose careers were launched by American Idol, you know its the best talent show on TV."
Argument
Who is considered to be the father of logic?
Aristotle
Ethos
Aristotle's idea was that we can be persuaded, first of all, by a speaker's personal attributes, including such things as his or her background, reputation, accomplishments, expertise, and similar things. Aristotle referred to this mode of persuasion as ethos
which of the following is not a premise indicator?
As a result...
false consensus effect
Assuming that the views held by members of our group are also held by society at large.
an if then sentence is considered to be an argument. True or False
False
A(n) ________ is a definition that points to, names, or describes something to which the defined term applies.
Definition by example
Loss aversion
Being more strongly motivated to avoid a loss than to accrue a gain.
Logos
Being persuaded by a speaker through his/her use of information and arguments
Ethos
Being persuaded by a speaker's personal attributes (background, reputation, accomplishments, expertise, etc.)
What is distributed in "No person can thrive without support"?
Both
What is distributed in the following statement? No students left home early.
Both
Kinds of Definitions
Definition by example Definition by synonym Analytical definition
experienced philosophers or other experts in their field rarely make mistakes. True or False?
False
_____. After all, ____.
C, P
A
Carl would like to help out, but he won't be in town. So we'll have to find someone else who owns a truck.
Chris mows the lawn in his bare feet because he doesn't realize how dangerous it is
Causal Explanation
I believe it because it's how I was raised to think, that's why
Causal Explanation
Why do you think that he will be a good leader -because he is trustworthy How do you know that? -he told us in his many speeches.
Circular reasoning
Counter-evidence
Claim that goes against conclusion
bounded rationality
Cognitive limitations that constrain one's ability to interpret, process, and act on information.
"No person is nice" and "some people are nice" are:
Contradictories
in logic, an argument is a feud or conflict. True or False?
False
~(P &Q) is equivalent to ~P v ~Q ~(P v Q) is equivalent to ~P &~Q
DeMorgan's Law
Some prosecutors are lawyers. Is missing what kind of term?
Distributed
E or A: Collis is absent today because she's ill
Explanation
E or A: Vikki: Say, remember the California Raisins? Whatever happened to them anyway? Nikki: They faded, I guess people got tired of them or something.
Explanation
'Language' means something like French, German, Spanish, English, and so on. This example is an example of a(n) _______ definition.
Enumerative
Jim, you are so cruel to animals. -No I'm not, Nancy, I am an animal lover, since I really love fried chicken.
Equivocation
Explanation vs. Argument
Explanation intended to provide info, argument intended to persuade based on evidence
"because" and "the reason" usually indicate ____ most of the time?
Explanations
Even if the order of the conjuncts and disjuncts are reversed in a conjunction or disjunction, respectively, truth is still preserved. However, truth IS NOT PRESERVED when the order is reversed for a conditional. P-->Q does not equal Q--->P
Even if the order of the conjuncts and disjuncts are reversed in a conjunction or disjunction, respectively, truth is still preserved. However, truth IS NOT PRESERVED when the order is reversed for a conditional. P-->Q does not equal Q--->P
Which of the following is an A statement?
Everyone who meets Judy likes her.
Every invalid argument has a true conclusion
False --some not all
Why did you punch that guy? -Well, when somebody is rude to you you can either stand up to him or be a coward, and I am not a coward.
False alternative
Definition by Synonym
Giving another word or phrase that means the same as the term being defined. "Fastidious' means the same as fussy"
Glittering Generalities
Glittering Generalities Advertisers often use words that stir up certain emotions in us. Sometimes, these words glitter and sparkle to attract our eye, or sometimes they make us angry or repulsed. "NEW!" . . . "Fresh" . . . "Pure" . . . "Home-made." Often these words are used in a vague way; they don't give us specific details: How new? How fresh? Pure what? Made in whose home? We could call these words "glittering generalities" because they use words that glitter and sparkle, while only stating generalities. That is, they give us a general, or vague sense of what they are trying to sell; they just LOOK good. Glittering generalities are used for their emotional value, not their logical value. Example: "Pure, fresh, mountain spring water. Bottled especially for you in Utah from only our purest mountain springs." When you read an ad like that, it's good to ask some questions: What makes mountain spring water better than Midwestern spring water? What makes this water fresher than other water? What makes it pure? How did they bottle it "especially for you?" And so on. Lots of questions, but the ad doesn't answer any of them. It only gives you glittering generalities. Example: "Miracle Diet Tea! Loose weight just by drinking tea! Our Miracle Diet Tea helps you to lose weight by absorbing most of the fat you eat before it is digested. Studies have shown that Miracle Diet Tea has helped millions of Americans! Thousands of doctors attest to the effectiveness of Miracle Diet Tea!"
What is logical strength?
How well an argument is structured.
What determines an argument's strength?
How well the premises support the conclusion
Proposition
Has been demonstrated when it has been shown to be the conclusion of a sound argument—an argument, that is, in which (1) all premises are true and (2) it is impossible for the premises to be true and for the conclusion to be false
Ambiguity
Having more than one claim.
Ambiguity
Having more than one meaning. An ambiguous claim is one that can be interpreted in more than one way and whose meaning is not made clear by the context
Which of the following claims is semantically ambiguous?
I saw a bat in the room.
The term "valid" means which of these?
IF the premises are true, the conclusion must logically be true, cannot be false
Relativism
Idea that truth is relative to the standards of a given culture
Which of the following is true?
If an argument in invalid, then it must be unsound.
"She has a lot of books. She must be an avid reader or a book collector." What kind of "or" is being used?
Inclusive
What kind of argument is the following? "There are tons of people gathering together in the Park, and I hear music playing. There's probably a concert today.
Inference to the best explanation.
Vagueness
Is a matter of degree; what matters is not being too vague for the purposes at hand.
Number claims and Diagram Argument: It's high time professional boxing was outlawed. Boxing almost always leads to brain damage, and anything that does that ought to be done away with. Besides, it supports organized crime
It's high time professional boxing was outlawed (1) . Boxing almost always leads to brain damage (2) , and anything that does that ought to be done away with (3) . Besides, it supports organized crime (4) 2+3 4 \ / 1
Downplayer
Just as it sounds, are used to play down or diminish importance.
There are Taliban in North Waziristan; if there are Taliban there, you can be sure they're in South Waziristan, too. So we have to believe there are Taliban in South Waziristan.
Modus ponens
moral subjectivism
Moral opinions are subjective
How to judge a persons expertise
Most important- Education & Experience Followed by- accomplishments, reputation, & position
Which of the following is false?
Most well-educated people do not have cognitive biases.
Deductive reasoning mostly represents what type of argument?
Mostly SOUND (though it can be valid), it is the logic of proof.
Which types of statements are truth functional?
Negation Conjunction Disjunction Conditional Biconditional
Quality of the News Media
News quality has decreased because the media is controlled by fewer corporations. Media can be "managed" by corporations, advertisers or government
"Some students in this class are people who like to think, therefore, some people who do not like to think are also in this class." This is a valid argument?
Not a valid argument?
Lucy is too short to reach the bottom of the sign.
Not an argument
The following is an example of what type of argument: God does not exist and it is absurd to think he does.
Not an argument
Implied Claim
Not stated but clearly implied given context
What are the four techniques used by demagogues?
Otherizing, demonizing, fostering xenophobia, and fear and hate mongering. All go hand in hand.
Definition by example (also called ostensive definition)
Pointing to, naming, or otherwise identifying one or more examples of the sort of thing to which the term applies: "By 'scripture,' I mean writings like the Bible and the Koran." "A mouse is this thing here, the one with the buttons."
Post Hoc
Post Hoc A Post Hoc is a fallacy with the following form: Post Hoc 1.A occurs before B. 2.Therefore A is the cause of B. The Post Hoc fallacy derives its name from the Latin phrase "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc." This has been traditionally interpreted as "After this, therefore because of this." This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that one event causes another simply because the proposed cause occurred before the proposed effect. More formally, the fallacy involves concluding that A causes or caused B because A occurs before B and there is not sufficient evidence to actually warrant such a claim. It is evident in many cases that the mere fact that A occurs before B in no way indicates a causal relationship. For example, suppose Jill, who is in London, sneezed at the exact same time an earthquake started in California. It would clearly be irrational to arrest Jill for starting a natural disaster, since there is no reason to suspect any causal connection between the two events. While such cases are quite obvious, the Post Hoc fallacy is fairly common because there are cases in which there might be some connection between the events. For example, a person who has her computer crash after she installs a new piece of software would probably suspect that the software was to blame. If she simply concluded that the software caused the crash because it was installed before the crash she would be committing the Post Hoc fallacy. In such cases the fallacy would be committed because the evidence provided fails to justify acceptance of the causal claim. It is even theoretically possible for the fallacy to be committed when A really does cause B, provided that the "evidence" given consists only of the claim that A occured before B. The key to the Post Hoc fallacy is not that there is no causal connection between A and B. It is that adequate evidence has not been provided for a claim that A causes B. Thus, Post Hoc resembles a Hasty Generalization in that it involves making a leap to an unwarranted conclusion. In the case of the Post Hoc fallacy, that leap is to a causal claim instead of a general proposition. Not surprisingly, many superstitions are probably based on Post Hoc reasoning. For example, suppose a person buys a good luck charm, does well on his exam, and then concludes that the good luck charm caused him to do well. This person would have fallen victim to the Post Hoc fallacy. This is not to say that all "superstitions" have no basis at all. For example, some "folk cures" have actually been found to work. Post Hoc fallacies are typically committed because people are simply not careful enough when they reason. Leaping to a causal conclusion is always easier and faster than actually investigating the phenomenon. However, such leaps tend to land far from the truth of the matter. Because Post Hoc fallacies are committed by drawing an unjustified causal conclusion, the key to avoiding them is careful investigation. While it is true that causes precede effects (outside of Star Trek, anyways), it is not true that precedence makes something a cause of something else. Because of this, a causal investigation should begin with finding what occurs before the effect in question, but it should not end there. Examples of Post Hoc 1.I had been doing pretty poorly this season. Then my girlfriend gave me this neon laces for my spikes and I won my next three races. Those laces must be good luck...if I keep on wearing them I can't help but win! 2.Bill purchases a new PowerMac and it works fine for months. He then buys and installs a new piece of software. The next time he starts up his Mac, it freezes. Bill concludes that the software must be the cause of the freeze. 3.Joan is scratched by a cat while visiting her friend. Two days later she comes down with a fever. Joan concludes that the cat's scratch must be the cause of her illness. 4.The Republicans pass a new tax reform law that benefits wealthly Americans. Shortly thereafter the economy takes a nose dive. The Democrats claim that the the tax reform caused the economic woes and they push to get rid of it. 5.The picture on Jim's old TV set goes out of focus. Jim goes over and strikes the TV soundly on the side and the picture goes back into focus. Jim tells his friend that hitting the TV fixed it. 6.Jane gets a rather large wart on her finger. Based on a story her father told her, she cuts a potato in half, rubs it on the wart and then buries it under the light of a full moon. Over the next month her wart shrinks and eventually vanishes. Jane writes her father to tell him how right he was about the cure.
A
Recent surveys for the National Science Foundation report that two of three adult Americans believe that alien spaceships account for UFO reports. It therefore seems likely that several million Americans may have been predisposed to accept the report on NBC's Unsolved Mysteries that the US military recovered a UFO with alien markings.
True or False. It is possible for an argument to have all true premises and a true conclusion but still be invalid.
True
ethos
Refers to generally CHARACTER, CREDIBILITY, ethics, or values
pathos
Refers to generally to an appeal based on emotion.
logos
Refers to generally to an appeal based on logic or reason.
loss aversion
Refers to people's tendency to prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains: it is better to not lose $5 than to find $5.
What is critical thinking?
Reflecting on one's own beliefs and trying to be objective about them.
Purposes of Definitions
Serve several purposes, but the top 3 are: 1. Tell us what a word means (main purpose) 2. Make the term more precise 3. Persuasion
Premise Indicators
Since, For, In view of, This is implied by.
assessing expertise
Skilfulness by virtue of possessing special knowledge. Education and experience in a relevant field is necessary. A career position can indicate reputation and can also indicate potential bias.
Analytical Definition
Specifying the features that a thing must possess in order for the term being defined to apply to it. Often take the form of a genus-and-species classification. "A samovar is an urn that has a spigot and is used especially in Russia to boil water for tea" Almost all dictionary definitions (lexical definitions) are analytical definitions.
Obedience to authority
The tendency to comply with instructions from an authority even when they conflict with our selves.
Belief Bias
The tendency to evaluate an argument by how believable its conclusion is.
3. The Knee Jerk Reaction
Writers record their first reaction to an issue without considering the issue in any depth or detail.
The more support the premise of an inductive argument provides for the conclusion, the (BLANK) the argument.
Stronger
Availability Heuristic
Studies show that most people exaggerate the likelihood of an event if they are reminded of it first.
S or O? "Buttermilk tastes kind of funny, you know what I mean? Kind of like it's gone bad?"
Subjective
S or O? "Fallon tells better jokes than Letterman."
Subjective
S or O? "Green is the most pleasant color to look at."
Subjective
S or O? "You should bathe your dog more often."
Subjective
S or O? "Your teacher would be crazy not to complain if you text in class."
Subjective
Beyonce's newest video is phenomenal!
Subjective Claim
Proof surrogate
Suggesting there is a reason to believe something without giving that reason.
What are the three types of ambiguity?
Syntactical, Semantic, Grouping
Content Test for Argument
Tests the truth value of a well formed argument's premises
"Looks like everyone is gonna vote for Jim this year. He must be the best. I will vote for him"
The Bandwagon Effect
The word "if" when used alone introduces which of the following?
The antecedent of a conditional
True or False. A valid argument can have false premises.
True
2 Types of ads
Those that offer reasons and those that do not. Always ask yourself if what you are going to purchase would improve our lives
Innuendo
To insinuate something derogatory.
"A square has 4 sides" - Objective Claim?
True
"Gina has swag" Subjective claim?
True
"Strong" and "weak" are relative descriptions of how much the premises support the conclusions of inductive arguments
True
A causal explanation can be a conclusion
True
A moral imperative prescribes an action, not for the sake of some result, but simply because that action is our moral duty.
True
A sound argument cannot have a false conclusion
True
how are heuristics linked to biases?
Tversky & Kahneman - damaging bias can occur when heuristics are used in contexts for which they are not designed
A standard-form categorical claim is represented in a Venn diagram by using exactly
Two circles
No Christians are liars. Contains how many distributed terms?
Two terms
Avialability Heuristic
Unconsciously assigning a probability to a type of event on the basis of how often one thinks on events of that type.
Fundamental attribution error
Understanding the behavior or others differently from how we understand our own behavior.
If you read Ayn Rand, you'll be a libertarian. And, of course, if you're an anarchist, you're already a libertarian. Hmm. It looks as if you read Ayn Rand, you'll be an anarchist!
Undistributed middle
What is being shown in this argument: (premise) The political party that best reflect mainstream opinion will win the presidency in 2016, (conclusion) and the Republican party best reflects mainstream opinion.
Unstated Conclusion: implying that the Republican Party would win.
What is being shown in this argument: Premise: You can't check out books from the library without an ID. Conclusion: Bill won't be able to check out any books.
Unstated Premise
Reputation
Very important as criterion of expertise. Must be used in context. Counts most is the one a person has among other experts in the field or endeavor. How well somebody thinks of them.
Number claims and diagram argument: Vote for Kucinich? No way. He's too radical, and he's too inexperienced, and those two things make him dangerous. I do like his stand on trade, but I still don't think you should vote for him.
Vote for Kucinich? No way (1). He's too radical (2), and he's too inexperienced (3), and those two things make him dangerous (4). I do like his stand on trade (5), but I still don't think you should vote for him (1). 2+3+4 5 \ x 1
Status Quo Bias
We are biased to defend the status quo, even when we know it's not good.
Iraq posed a threat to us, so we had a right to invade it.
We have a right to invade any country that poses a threat to us.
Belief Bias/Confirmation Bias
We tend to find and over-value evidence or arguments that support our position and ignore or reject evidence and arguments that oppose our position
Balance of considerations reasoning
Weighing considerations for and against thinking or doing something
Pictures, Ads, Lists of Facts, Conditionals, A because B, Movies
What are not arguments?
"because"
What follows "because" in the sentence on the left is the cause. What follows "because" in the right-hand sentence is evidence. Arguments and cause/effect statements can both employ the phrase "X because Y." But there the similarity ends. When what follows "because" is a reason for accepting a contention, or evidence for it, we have an argument; when what follows "because" states the cause of something, we have a cause/effect explanation. These are entirely different enterprises
Background Information or Background Knowledge
What we have observed or what we think we know. Our own observations provide a reliable source & it is reasonable to be suspicious of a claim that comes into conflict with what we have observed. Is essential to adequatly assess a claim.
Claim
When a belief is asserted in a declarative sentence, the result is a claim or statement
When is a level of vagueness acceptable?
When a claim is not too vague to convey appropriately useful information, it's level of vagueness is acceptable.
When is vagueness acceptable?
When a claim is not too vague to convey appropriately useful information, its level of vagueness is acceptable. Ex: If a politician specifies enough about his tax plan to assure us that we understand how it would apply, then we should not complain of vagueness.
examples of words that indicate a conclusion
accordingly, consequently, therefore
Main issue: Intravenous drug use with nostril needles has become one of the leading causes of the spread of AIDS. Many states passed legislation allowing officials to distribute clean needles in an effort to combat this method of infection. But in eleven states, including some of the most populous, possession of hypodermic syringes without a prescription is illegal. The laws in these foot-dragging states have to be changed if we ever hope to bring this awful epidemic to an end.
Whether the laws have to be changed.
Which of these normally would call for a balance of considerations argument?
Whether to go with AT&T or Verizon
A rhetorical device can give people the impression that the claim involved is justified while in fact it is not. Is a true statement?
Yes
big "T" truth
absolute
Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence
Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence.
the less initial plausibility a claim has, the more __________ it seems. The less the claim fits with our background info, the more ___________ we should be.
extraordinary, suspicious
relevance fallacy (red herring)
premise is not relevant to the issue
deductive argument
premises are intended to provide logically conclusive support for its conclusion -that is, the premises are intended to guarantee the truth of the conclusion. If premises are true, conclusion must be true
how does the media capture our attention?
presents: - Limited information that appeals to emotion and daily life - Information that is out of context
Aaron saw Ben after his Bat Mitzvah. What type of ambiguity is this?
pronoun reference
Beliefs and claims are also known as
propositional, which means it can be expressed in a declarative sentence-- a sentence either true or false.
analytical definition
specification of the features a thing must posses in order for the term being defined
generality is lack of ______
specificity
Analytic Definition
specifying the features a thing must possess in order for the term being defined to apply to it defining something by asking 1. What type of thing is it/ what group does it belong to 2. How is it unique within that group
conditional statement
statement A is true on the condition that statement B is true
Arguments consist entirely of
statements, i.e., sentences that it makes sense to regard as either true or false. Questions, commands, exclamations, etc. cannot be parts of arguments. (Keep in mind that rhetorical questions should be treated as statements.)
What are some devices used in downplaying?
stereotypes, rhetorical comparisons, rhetorical explanations, and innuendos.
In this case the "defendant" will refer to Professor Plum. What kind of definition?
stipulative
Inductive structure and content test
strength and cogency
Inductive arguments are first judged as being...
strong or weak. The argument is said to be strong if the probability of the conclusion coming from the premises is high. If the probability is low the argument is said to be weak.
Fill in blank: The more support the premise of an inductive argument provides for the conclusion, the ____ the argument.
stronger
The more support the premise of an inductive argument provides for the conclusion, the _________ the argument.
stronger
the more support the premise of an inductive argument provides for the conclusion, the ________ the argument
stronger
Saying that Paris is the most beautiful city in the world is a ________ claim.
subjective
in the conditional "if p, then q" p is
sufficient for q
Some valid arguments have a true conclusion
True
True or False: A belief cannot be expressed in a declartive sentence
False
Factual Opinion/Belief/Claim=
Objective Opinion/Belief/Claim
Dysphemism
Replace a term with something that makes it sound worse
Sound arguments are deductive arguments that are valid.
True
premising definitions should be _________ in nature
neutral
conclusion indicator
thus, therefore, hence, so, consequently
If p is Leo sings the blues and q is Fat sings the blues, what distinction is made involving parenthesis? ~(q v r)
-it is not the case that either Leo sings the blues or Fat sings the blues. -says that NEITHER Leo nor Fat sings the blues
pseudoreasoning: common practice
"It's o.k. for me to do it. Everybody does it."
NA
"Like short term memory, long term memory retains information that is encoded in terms of sense modality and in terms of links with information that was learned earlier (that is, meaning)."
Isolate and discuss the rhetorical devices that appear in the following passage: Surely you can't say that the American people have ever been behind Bill Clinton. After all, he got a mere 43 million votes in 1992, which is five million fewer than what George Bush got when he beat Dukakis in 1988. A. Weaseler B. Innuendo C. Downplayer D. None of the Above E. All of the Above
"Mere" is a downplayer.
post hoc, ergo propter hoc
"after this, therefore because of it" thinking that a temporal succession between two variables, in and of itself, establishes a cause-and-effect connection between them. Assumes two events are related because one happened after the other. Even if they are correlated, this doesn't necessarily mean there is causation.
Unclear on the Concept:
"We don't discriminate. We simply exclude certain types of people."
If p is Leo sings the blues and q is Fat sings the blues, what distinction is made involving parenthesis? ~(q & r)
-it is not the case that Leo sings the blues and Fat sings the blues -says that it's not the case that both sing the blues concurrently. Maybe Leo sings and Fat doesn't or vice versa
disadvantages of heuristics
- often not the best solution - may mislead us
What part of a conditional (antecedent or consequent) does "provided" introduce? "whenever''? ''given'' ''assuming''?
-provided introduced the antecedent; p provided q= q-->p -whenever introduces antecedent; whenever p, q= p-->q -given introduces the antecedent; given p, q /q given p= p->q -assuming introduces the antecedent; q assuming that p=p-->q
What part of a conditional (antecedent or consequent) does ''sufficient'', ''necessary'', ''on the condition that'' and ''implies that'' introduce?
-sufficient introduces the consequent: A is sufficient for C= A--C -necessary introduces the antecedent C is necessary for A= A-->C -on the condition that introduces the antecedent: C on the condition that A= A-->C -implies that introduces the consequent: A implies that C= A-->C
What are the truth values in each guide column for a 3 variable truth table?
-the first column is 4Ts , then 4Fs -the 2nd column is alternating pairs of truth values beginning with TT -the 3rd column is alternating Ts and Fs starting with T
What are logical connectives?
-words, such as ''if-then'', ''or'','' and'', ''not'' -they help to specify the relationships between statements and thus shape the form of the argument
An Argumentative Essay Consists of..
1. A statement of the issue 2. A statement of one's position on that issue 3. Arguments that support one's positon 4. Rebuttals of arguments that support contrary positions.
Purposes of definitions
1. To tell us what a word means. 2. Sometimes the usual meaning of a word or phrase is too vague or too general to be useful in a give context, so a definition is needed to make the term more precise. 3. Definitions can also be used to persuade; such use is often labeled the persuasive or rhetorical use of definition.
There are degrees of credibility. Ask 2 questions when a claim is presented.
1. When does the content of a claim present a problem? 2. When does the source of a claim lack credibility?
things that affect people's observations
1. beliefs and fears 2. physical surroundings (light, noise, distance, sight perspective) 3. expectations 4. emotional/ mental state
Internet has 2 types of sources
1. commercial & intsitutional sources 2. individual & group sites The information you get is only as good as its source.
ways claims can lack credibility ( 3)
1. conflict w/ direct observation 2. conflict w/ background info 3. lack credible source
Represent the following argument with variables, (g = give someone a greeting card; c = care about him). 1. If you give someone a greeting card, then you care about him. 2. She doesn't care about him. 3. Therefore, she doesn't give him a greeting card.
1. if g, then c 2. not-c 3 Therefore, not-g
ways to acquire board general knowledge (3)
1. inquiring attitude 2. read widely 3. converse freely
credibility of sources
1. whether the source has real knowledge about the issue in question
you entitled to say you know something when (2 reasons)
1. you have no reason to believe you are mistaken 2. you have solid evidence for believing it
Rhetorical definition
A pseudo-definition used to express our feelings or influence someone else's.
Number claims and Diagram argument: The slide in the dollar must be stopped. It contributes to inflation and increases the cost of imports. True, it helps exports, but on balance it is bad for the economy.
2 3 4 \ | x 5 / 1
conjunction
2 simple statements joined by a connective to form a compound statement (symbolized as p & q) -make sure the connective really is joining two distinct statements and not a set of compound nouns
Cognitive Bias
A psychological factor that unconsciously affects belief formation
Semantic ambiguity
A claim with an obvious, ambiguous word or phrase. Ex: "Jessica is cold" may be saying something about Jessica's temperature or something about her personality.
Vagueness
A concept is vague if we cannot say with certainty what is includes and what it excludes.
Vague
A concept is vague if we cannot say with certainty whats it includes and what it excludes When a claim is not too vague to convey appropriately useful information, its level of vagueness is acceptable. For example, if the directions we're given are not too vague to help us find our destination, they pass the test
What is the best definition of an argument below?
A conclusion which is supported by premises.
What is the definition of "Argument"?
A conclusion with at least one premise, defined as a reason why we should believe or agree with the conclusion
Under what circumstance is a conditional false? (truth table definition of the connective)
A conditional is false if and only if its antecedent is true and the consequent is false. -in all other possible combinations of truth values (FF, FT, TT), a conditional is true
Argument
A consideration for accepting a claim
What is the definition of "Claim"?
A declarative sentence with truth value, i.e., that is either true or false and a proposition
Fallacy/ Wishful Thinking
A fallacy is a mistake in reasoning. Occurs when we allow our hopes & desires to influence our beliefs
overlooking the possibility of reversed causation
A fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer overlooks the possibility that the stated cause may actually be the effect, and the stated effect may actually be the cause.
Genetic Fallacy
A fallacy that occurs when someone argues that the origin of a contention in and of itself automatically renders it false.
Website Credibility General Rule
A flashy design is no substitute for information that is backed up by references and put forward by people with appropriate credentials
What is an argument?
A number of statements or propositions where one is a conclusion and the others are premises meant to support the conclusion.
What is Initial Plausibility?
A rough assessment of how credible a claim seems to be
Initial Plausibility
A rough assessment of of how credible a claim seems to be. The assessment depends on how consistent the claim is with our background information. There is a scale of I.P. ranging from quite plausible to slightly so.
Grouping ambiguity
A special kind of semantic ambiguity that results when it is not clear whether a word is being used to refer to a group collectively or to members of the group individually. Ex: "Secretaries make more money than physicians do." The example is true if the speaker refers to secretaries and physicians collectively, since there are many more secretaries than there are physicians. But it is obviously false if the two words refer to individual secretaries and physicians.
argument
A statement put forth and supported by evidence
Confirmation Bias
A tendency to attach more weight to considerations that support our views.
Sound argument
A valid argument whose premises are true.
Inference is:
A way of learning about the world by recognizing the connection between things we know and other things to which they are conceptually tied.
Testimony is:
A way to learn about the world by others' statements.
Perception is:
A way to learn about the world through direct experience.
conclusion indicator
A word or phrase (e.g., "therefore") that ordinarily indicates the presence of the conclusion of an argument
Vague
A word or phrase is vague if we cannot say with certainty what it includes and what is excludes. Ex: "bald," "rich," "small"
Ambiguous
A word, phrase, or sentence is said to be ambiguous when it has more than one meaning. Ex:" Jessica is renting her house" could mean that she's renting it to someone or from someone
Valid arguments are always sound.
False
Determine whether the following claim is best classified as semantically ambiguous (and whether this contains grouping ambiguities), syntactically ambiguous, or free from ambiguity: When the head waiter asked whether she had reservations, she said, "Yes, but I'm going to eat here anyway." A. Semantically Ambiguous B. Syntactically Ambiguous C. Freefrom Ambiguity
A. Semantically Ambiguous
Translate "Foolish is the person who lies to his loved ones" into standard form.
All people who lie to their loved ones are foolish.
Inference to the best explanation (IBE)
An argument whose conclusion states the most likely cause of something
What determines factual strength?
An argument's content
Argument
An attempt to support or prove a contention by providing a reason for accepting it. Sometimes used to refer only to the Argument.
Complication of arguments
Arguments can contain unstated premises Example: Premise: You can't check out books from the library without an ID. Conclusion: Bill won't be able to check out any books. Unstated Premise: The unstated premise must be that Bill has no ID
induction fallacies
Arguments that are supposed to raise the probability of their conclusions, but are so weak as to fail almost entirely to do so.
A or N/A: "It may be true that people, not guns, kill people. But people with guns kill more people than people without guns. As long as the number of lethal weapons in the hands of the American people continues to grow, so will the murder rate."
Argument
A or N/A: Carl would like to help out, but he won't be in town. So we'll have to find someone else who owns a truck.
Argument
The fewer hands that control the media, the easier it is for the news to be __________
managed
Military Media
manages their own media by not allowing photographs & suppression of news
Identify any fallacies in the following passage: Gays in the military? Yes. Maybe you favor excluding everyone except for white Anglo-Saxon males with adolescent personalities, but not me. A. Ad hominem (inconsistency) B. Straw Man C. Line Drawing D. None of the Above E. All of the Above
B. Straw Man
Determine whether the following claim is best classified as semantically ambiguous (and whether this contains grouping ambiguities), syntactically ambiguous, or free from ambiguity: If properly frosted, a person shouldn't notice lumps in a cake. A. Semantically Ambiguous B. Syntactically Ambiguous C. Freefrom Ambiguity
B. Syntactically Ambiguous
Determine whether the following claim is best classified as semantically ambiguous (and whether this contains grouping ambiguities), syntactically ambiguous, or free from ambiguity: Sign in a hotel: NO SMOKING ROOMS AVAILABLE. A. Semantically Ambiguous B. Syntactically Ambiguous C. Freefrom Ambiguity
B. Syntactically Ambiguous
Classify the following: "'Freedom' is just another word for nothing left to lose."—Kris Kristofferson A. definition by example B. definition by synonym C. analytical definition
B. definition by synonym
The first order of business when it comes to thinking critically about an issue is to A. determine whether the issue is objective. B. determine what, exactly, the issue is. C. identify the premise of the issue. D. identify the conclusion of the issue.
B. determine what, exactly, the issue is.
euphemism
neutral or positive expression used in place of one that carries negative associations
For the following, indicate whether the definition given is by example, by synonym, or analytical: "Epistemologist" means a philosopher or other intellectual who studies the nature of knowledge. A. ByExample B. BySynonym C. Analytical
C. Analytical
For the following, indicate whether the definition given is by example, by synonym, or analytical: "Widow" refers to a woman whose husband has died. A. ByExample B. BySynonym C. Analytical
C. Analytical
Which of the following is the most general statement? A. That professor failed to give any constructive feedback on my paper. B. I've never before had such a disorganized and unhelpful professor. C. I've got a problem with that professor. D. That professor is very disorganized.
C. I've got a problem with that professor.
Euphemism
neutral or positive expression used in place of one that carries negative associations.
Classify the following: "To philosophers, a realist is a person who believes in the existence of a world outside the mind." A. definition by example B. definition by synonym C. analytical definition
C. analytical definition
If we know that an argument is weak, then we know that the conclusion A. is false. B. is true. C. may or may not be true.
C. may or may not be true.
"Should welfare recipients repay the state before they collect their winnings from the lottery? On the one hand, if you borrow money from somebody and win the lottery with it, you should repay the loan out of your winnings. But on the other hand, welfare is not a loan. It is a payment to people to help them improve their lives in the best way they can." Which of the following best states the primary issue discussed in the passage? A. whether welfare is a loan B. whether welfare should be used to play the lottery C. whether welfare recipients should repay the state before they collect winnings from the lottery D. whether the fact that welfare is a loan means that welfare recipients should repay the state before they collect winnings from the lottery
C. whether welfare recipients should repay the state before they collect winnings from the lottery
Pictures
CANNOT be premises, conclusions, or arguments
What are some conunctions that can be used to downplay claims that precede them?
nevertheless, however. still, but.
That dessert contained caffeine, so you might have trouble sleeping tonight.
Caffeine usually causes trouble sleeping.
If the carburetor is clogged, the engine will run lean, and running lean will lead to overheating. So overheating can result if the carburetor is clogged up.
Chain argument
Persuasive Writing
Confine your discussion of an opponent's point of view to issues rather than personal considerations. When rebutting an opposing viewpoint, avoid being strident or insulting. Don't call opposing arguments absurd or ridiculous. If an opponent's argument is good, concede that it is good. If space or time is limited, be sure to concentrate on the most important considerations. Don't become obsessive about refuting every last criticism of your position. Present your strongest arguments first.
True or False. A valid argument must have a true conclusion
False
True or False. If an argument has all true premises and a true conclusion, then it is valid.
False
persuasive or rhetorical use of definition
Definitions can also be used to persuade rhetorical uses of definitions frequently make use of the emotive meaning (or, if you prefer, the rhetorical force) of words. This meaning consists of the positive or negative associations of a word
precising definitions or stipulative definitions
Definitions that make a term more precise or that stipulate new or different meanings for them
Make the term more precise
Definitions that make a term more precise or that stipulate new or different meanings for them Precising definitions Stipulative definitions
Precising definitions or stimulative definitions
Definitions that make a term more precise or that stipulate new or different meanings for them. -These labels apply to certain uses of definitions, not to kinds of definitions
True or False. If an invalid argument has all true premises, then the conclusion must be false.
False
True or False. You can have a sound argument that is invalid.
False
Neurosis' means a chronic emotional disturbance that arises from suppressed or forgotten emotional stress (such as resentment, hostility, aggression, or guilt) experienced in early childhood. This is an example of a(n) ______ definition
Explanatory
"Diane will be fine if her surgery goes well." In this sentence, "if her surgery goes well" is the consequent.
F
A conditional is an argument involving an antecedent and a consequent.
F
A valid argument cannot have any false premises.
F
A valid argument is also sound.
F
An argument is valid if the premises make the conclusion more likely.
F
False Dilemma
False Dilemma - (also known as: false dichotomy*, the either-or fallacy, either-or reasoning, fallacy of false choice, fallacy of false alternatives, black-and-white thinking, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, bifurcation, excluded middle, no middle ground, polarization) Description: When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by "either this or that" language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices. Another variety is the false trilemma, which is when three choices are presented when more exist. Logical Form: Either X or Y is true. Either X, Y, or Z is true. Example (two choices): You are either with God, or against him. Explanation: As Obi Wan Kenobi so eloquently puts it in Star Wars episode III, "Only a Sith deals in absolutes!" There are also those who simply don't believe there is a God to be either with or against. Example (omission): I thought you were a good person, but you weren't at church today. Explanation: The assumption here is that bad people don't go to church. Of course, good people exist who don't go to church, and good church-going people could have had a really good reason not to be in church -- like a hangover from the swingers' gathering the night before. Exception: There may be cases when the number of options really is limited. For example, if an ice cream man just has chocolate and vanilla left, it would be a waste of time insisting he has mint chocolate chip. It is also not a fallacy if other options exist, but you are not offering other options as a possibility. For example: Mom: Billy, it's time for bed. Billy: Can I stay up and watch a movie? Mom: You can either go to bed or stay up for another 30 minutes and read. Billy: That is a false dilemma! Mom: No, it's not. Here, read Bo's book and you will see why. Billy: This is freaky, our exact conversation is used as an example in this book! Tip: Be conscious of how many times you are presented with false dilemmas, and how many times you present yourself with false dilemmas. * Staying true to the definitions, the false dilemma is different from the false dichotomy in that a dilemma implies two equally unattractive options whereas a dichotomy generally comprises two opposites. This is a fine point, however, and is generally ignored in common usage.
A
Fears that chemicals in teething rings and soft plastic toys may cause cancer may be justifies. Last week, the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a report confirming that low amounts of DEHP, know to cause liver cancer in lab animals, may be absorbed from certain infant products.
An argument's validity depends upon its:
Form
Education Includes
Formal education, degrees from established institutions
Which of the following is true?
If the premises of a valid argument are all true, then its conclusion must be true.
Rebuttals
If there are well-known arguments for the other side of the issue, you should acknowledge them and offer some reason to believe that they are unconvincing. Done by attacking premises that are commonly given or by trying to show that those premises do not actually support the opposing conclusion
Writting Argumentive essays
If there are well-known arguments for the other side of the issue, you should acknowledge them and offer some reason to believe that they are unconvincing. You can do this either by attacking the premises that are commonly given or by trying to show that those premises do not actually support the opposing conclusion. 1.Focus. Make clear at the outset what issue you intend to address and what your position on the issue will be. However, nothing is quite so boring as starting off with the words "In this essay, I will argue that X, Y, and Z," and then going on to itemize everything you are about to say, and at the end concluding with the words "In this essay, I argued that X, Y, and Z." As a matter of style, you should let the reader know what to expect without using trite phrases and without going on at length. However, you should try to find an engaging way to state your position. For example, instead of "In this essay, I will discuss the rights of animals to inherit property from their masters," you might begin, "Could your inheritance wind up belonging to your mother's cat?" 2.Stick to the issue. All points you make in an essay should be connected to the issue under discussion and should always either (a) support, illustrate, explain, clarify, elaborate on, or emphasize your position on the issue or (b) serve as responses to anticipated objections. Rid the essay of irrelevancies and dangling thoughts. 3.Arrange the components of the essay in a logical sequence. This is just common sense. Make a point before you clarify it, for example, not the other way around. When supporting your points, bring in examples, clarification, and the like in such a way that a reader knows what in the world you are doing. A reader should be able to discern the relationship between any given sentence and your ultimate objective, and he or she should be able to move from sentence to sentence and from paragraph to paragraph without getting lost or confused. If a reader cannot outline your essay with ease, you have not properly sequenced your material. Your essay might be fine as a piece of French philosophy, but it would not pass as an argumentative essay. 4.Be complete. Accomplish what you set out to accomplish, support your position adequately, and anticipate and respond to possible objections. Keep in mind that many issues are too large to be treated exhaustively in a single essay. The key to being complete is to define the issue sharply enough that you can be complete. Thus, the more limited your topic, the easier it is to be complete in covering it. Also, be sure there is closure at every level. Sentences should be complete, paragraphs should be unified as wholes (and usually each should stick to a single point), and the essay should reach a conclusion. Incidentally, reaching a conclusion and summarizing are not the same thing. Short essays do not require summaries.
Please translate the following into standard form: I will go to the party if you go.
If you go to the party, then I will go.
A
In 1976, Washington DC passed an ordinance prohibiting private ownership of firearms. Since then, Washington;s murder rate has shot up 121 percent. Bans on firearms are clearly counterproductive.
In a 2-variable truth table, the first two columns of Ts and Fs represent the 4 possible sets of truth values for the variables. In other words, the table shows that there are only 4 combinations of truth values for the pair of variables p and q: TT, TF, FT, FF. These are the only combinations possible for a 2-variable compound.
In a 2-variable truth table, the first two columns of Ts and Fs represent the 4 possible sets of truth values for the variables. In other words, the table shows that there are only 4 combinations of truth values for the pair of variables p and q: TT, TF, FT, FF. These are the only combinations possible for a 2-variable compound.
conclusion
In an argument, the claim for which a premise is supposed to give a reason
Conclusion
In an argument, the claim thought to be supported or demonstrated by another claim
Writing in a Diverse Society
In closing, it seems appropriate to mention how important it is to avoid writing in a manner that reinforces questionable assumptions and attitudes about people's gender, ethnic background, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability or disability, or other characteristics. Careless word choices relative to such characteristics not only are imprecise and inaccurate but also may be viewed as biased even if they were not intended to be, and thus they may diminish the writer's credibility. We are a society that aspires to be just, a society that strives not to withhold its benefits from individuals on the basis of their ethnic or racial background, skin color, religion, gender, or disability. "Always" and "never" are two words you should always remember never to use.
The following is an example of what type of argument: OJ Simpson killed his wife. We have the blood-stained Bruno Malle shoes. He does not have a solid alibi and he hated his wife.
Inductive and Abductive
The following is an example of what type of argument: We can believe Jesus Christ resurrected from the grave because the disciples genuinely believed he did and the tomb was empty.
Inductive and Abductive
Inductive arguments vs. Deductive arguments
Inductive arguments can be compared as to strength and weakness; Deductive arguments can be compared as to validity and soundness
Inference to the Best Explanation
Inductive reasoning in which the conclusion explains the cause of something. *but does not prove yit.
"You'll get an A in the class," she predicted. "What makes you say that?" he asked. "Because," she said, "if you get an A, then you're smart, and you are smart." is the argument:
Invalid
Argument or non-argument: The directory of Intentional Communities lists more than two hundred groups across the country organized around a wide variety of purposes, including environmentally aware living.
Non-argument
S or O? "Your teacher will complain if you text in class."
Objective
God exists
Objective Claim
Because all Communists are Marxists, all Marxists are Communists.
Premise: All Communists are Marxists Conclusion: All Marxists are Communists
Because all Communists are Marxists, all Marxists are Communists.
Premise: All Communists are Marxists Conclusion: All Marxists are Communists
Hey, he can't be older than his mother's daughter's brother. His mother's daughter has only one brother.
Premise: His mother's daughter has only one brother Conclusion: He isn't older than his mother's daughter's brother
"Let me demonstrate the principle by means of logic," the teacher said, holding up a bucket. "If this bucket has a hole in it, then it will leak. But it doesn't leak. Therefore, obviously, it doesn't have a hole in it."
Premise: If this bucket has a hole in it, then it will leak Premise: It doesn't leak Conclusion: It doesn't have a hole in it
We shouldn't take a chance on this new candidate. She's from Alamo Polytech, and the last person we hired from there was rotten.
Premise: She's from Alamo Polytech Premise: The last person we hired from there was rotten Conclusion: We shouldn't take a chance on the new candidate
If a valid argument has a false conclusion, then not all its premises can be true
True
If a valid argument has a false conclusion, then not all its premises can be true.
True
Which of the following best describes a valid argument?
The conclusion of a valid argument is guaranteed to be true if all its premises are true.
Moral Subjectivism
The idea that moral opinions; dog fighting is wrong, is subjective
Which of the following is a subjective claim?
This suit is too expensive
necessary conditions are always on what side of a conditional
The consequent (the "then" side)
The phrase "only if" introduces which of the following?
The consequent of a conditional
In estimating the moral worth of what people do, utilitarianism seems to discount people's intentions.
True
In logic, an argument is a feud or conflict. True or false?
True
Legal reasoning and moral reasoning both lead to prescriptions about whether or not certain actions should be done.
True
most likely the reason why advertisers, owners, and managers pressure the media?
The media is driven by the necessity to make a profit
stronger/weaker arguments
The more support the premise of an inductive arguments provides for the conclusions, the STRONGER it is. The less support it provides, the WEAKER the argument.
Vagueness
The most common form of unclear thinking or writing is excessive vagueness. A word or phrase is vague if we cannot say with certainty what it includes and what it excludes. Ex. "baldness" "rich" "small" Can be intentional (politicians) to avoid giving a clear, precise answer.
Which of the following is equivalent to "Only S are P"?
The only P are S.
No sound arguments have a false conclusion
True
Objective claims can be true or false. : True or false?
True
Deductive argument
The premise of a good deductive argument, if true, proves or demonstrates its conclusion.
Inductive argument
The premises of good inductive arguments don't demonstrate their conclusions; they support them.
Premise
The reason or reasons for accepting the conclusion in an argument
Premise
The reason(s) for accepting a claim. A premise can only offer support for a conclusion if the premise is true. A premise can only offer support to a conclusion if it is relevant.
Logos
The speaker may persuade us by using information and arguments—what he called logos logos—rational argumentation—is one of the least effective ways of winning someone to your point of view Example: Why try to persuade people by rational argument that they need a breadmaker when you can get them to think they do simply by making them believe they have sniffed out a bargain?
self-perception theory
The theory that when our attitudes and feelings are uncertain or ambiguous, we infer these states by observing our behavior and the situation in which it occurs
The truth table can tell us definitively whether an argument is invalid b/c the table includes every possible combination of truth values. If the truth table doesn't reveal a situation in which the argument has true premises and a false conclusion, then the argument is valid.
The truth table can tell us definitively whether an argument is invalid b/c the table includes every possible combination of truth values. If the truth table doesn't reveal a situation in which the argument has true premises and a false conclusion, then the argument is valid.
The Stream-of-Consciousness Ramble.(bad)
This type of essay results when writers make no attempt to organize their thoughts and simply spew them out in the order in which they come to mind.
Conclusion Indicators
Therefore, Thus, Hence, So, Consequently, Accordingly, This shows that...
Rhetorical explanations
These are intended to influence attitudes or affect behavior; they often make use of images with positive or negative associations.
Reasoning used by jurists and attorneys in applying the law is both deductive and inductive.
True
Some invalid arguments have a false conclusion
True
Some invalid arguments have a false premise
True
Some invalid arguments have a true conclusion
True
Some opinions are not subjective, because their truth or falsity is independent of what people think. A. True B. False
True
Lexical definitions
They tell us what the word ordinarily means. Almost all dictionary definitions are of the analytical variety (lexical).
How is news on social media sites biased and how does it affect observer?
Things sent to us are often tailored to our interests by website viewing history => echoing and reinforcing our interests, preferences and biases
Some unsound arguments have a false conclusion
True
Some valid arguments are unsound
True
What is the definition of "Critical Thinking" as taught in this course?
Thinking about thinking - our own as well as others'
Begging the Question
This fallacy occurs when a speaker or writer tries to "support" or "demonstrate" a contention by offering as "evidence" or "proof" what amounts to a repackaging of the very contention in question.
Misplacing the Burden of Proof
This fallacy occurs when an attempt is made to support or prove a point by trying to make us disprove it.
Identifying Reasons That are Helpful in Focusing Perception 2 Determine whether the following reasons are (1) helpful in focusing perception to elicit a favorable response, (2) helpful in focusing perception to elicit an unfavorable response, (3) too vague to focus perception, (4) false or implausible and therefore unable to focus perception, or (5) irrelevant to focusing perception. The information you need is contained in the reasons, so try to visualize or imagine what the work is like from what is said. All of these are paraphrases of testimony given at a hearing in 1985 about a proposal to remove Tilted Arc, an immense abstract sculpture, from a plaza in front of a federal office building.
Too vague to focus perception Helpful in focusing perception to elicit an unfavorable response False or implausible and therefore unable to focus perception Too vague to focus perception
An "if...then" statement can be a premise
True
An argument can be valid but not sound
True
An argument can have an unstated premise or an unstated conclusion
True
An argument can have multiple premises.
True
Arguments whose premises are intended to provide absolutely conclusive reasons for accepting the conclusion are deductive.
True
Every sound argument has a true conclusion
True
Gender is an irrelevant feature in judging a person's credibility. A. True B. False
True
Syntactic Ambiguity
When a claim is open to 2 or ore interpretations because of its structure (syntax) Rewriting is the key to eliminating syntactic ambiguity Ex. "to travel in Canada you will need a birth certificate or a driver's license and other photo ID"
What is semantic?
When a statement contains an expression that has more than one meaning,
counterexample instance
When an argument is shown to have true premises and false conclusion thus making the argument invalid
When dealing with simple arguments, the first 2 columns of a truth table are guide columns in which the variables, or letters, of the argument are listed, followed by a column for each premises and then a column for the conclusion
When dealing with simple arguments, the first 2 columns of a truth table are guide columns in which the variables, or letters, of the argument are listed, followed by a column for each premises and then a column for the conclusion
cognitive nudge
When information is arranged in a way that makes some decisions more likely than others
What is grouping?
When it is unclear if you are referring to a group of things collectively or individually.
bandwagon effect
When people join a cause because it seems popular or support a candidate who is leading in the polls
What is syntactical?
When the structure or grammar of a sentence renders the meaning of a word or phrase uncertain.
Main issue: The best way to avoid error - that is, belief in something false - is to suspend judgment about everything except that which is absolutely certain. Because error usually leads to trouble, this shows that suspension of judgment is usually the right thing to do.
Whether the best way to avoid error is to suspend judgment about everything except that which is absolutely certain.
Better than average illusion
When we rate ourselves better than other people in our group.
Inductively
When we reason ____ we try to support a conclusion.
Deductively
When we reason _____ we try to prove or demonstrate a conclusion.
What would make x a necessary condition for y?
Whenever y is the case, x must also be the case
Main issue: It is dumb to claim that sales taxes hit poor people harder than rich people. After all, the more money you have to spend, and the more money you spend, the more sales taxes you pay. So people with more money are always going to be paying more in sales tax than poor people.
Whether (a) people with money pay more in sales tax than poor people, (b) it is a mistake to think so
Main issue: Sure, some of the hot-doggers get good grades in Professor Bubacz's class. But my guess is that if Algernon takes it, all it'll get him is flunked out.
Whether Algernon will flunk out of Professor Bubacz's class.
Let me tell you why Hank ought not to take that math course. First, it's too hard, and he'll probably flunk it. Second, he's going to spend the whole term in a state of frustration. Third, he'll probably get depressed and do poorly in a ll the rest of his courses. (What's the main issue?)
Whether Hank ought to take the math course
Subjective Claim
Whether a subjective claim is true or false is not independent of whether people think it is true or false. (Based mostly on opnion)..
Ambiguity
Word, phrase, or sentence that has more than one meaning. Ex. "Jessica is renting her house" is she renting it or is she renting it out? Most of the time the interpretation that a speaker intends for a claim is obvious, but sometimes not
Weaseler
Wording used to protect a claim from criticism by weakening or qualifying it.
4. The Glancing Blow
Writers address an issue not quite on topic. If you research benefits of cycling, you bury paper with history of cycling.
1. The Windy Preamble
Writers avoid getting to the issue and go at length with introductory remarks.
2. The Stream-of-Consciousness Ramble
Writers make no attemp to organize their thoughts and simply spew them out in the order in which they come to mind.
The Windy Preamble. (bad)
Writers of this type of essay avoid getting to the issue and instead go on at length with introductory remarks, often about how important the issue is, how it has troubled thinkers for centuries, how opinions on the issue are many and various, and so on, and so on. Anything you write that smacks of "When in the course of human events ..." should go into the trash can immediately.
Let the Reader Do the Work. (bad)
Writers of this type of essay expect the reader to follow them through non sequiturs, abrupt shifts in direction, and irrelevant sidetracks.
cognitive dissonance
unpleasant mental experience of tension resulting from two conflicting thoughts or beliefs
valid argument
a deductive argument that succeeds in providing logical conclusive support for its conclusion -The conclusion logically follows from the premises -a deductively valid argument is such that if its premises are true, its conclusions must be true. That is,if the premises are true, there's no way that the conclusion can be false -can have false premises and false conclusion, false premise and true conclusion, or true premise and true conclusion. It cannot have a true premise and false conclusion -IT'S ABOUT FORM!! NOT CONTENT
line-drawing fallacy
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer assumes that either a crystal clear line can be drawn between two things, or they cannot really be differentiated
straw man
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer attempts to dismiss a contention by distorting or misrepresenting it
ad hominem argument
a fallacy that occurs when a speaker or writer attempts to dismiss someones position by dismissing the person - rather than attacking his or her position
A passage is an argument if and only if
a) It is a group of two or more statements, b) one of those statements (the conclusion) is claimed or intended to be supported by the other(s) (the premises)
"There is life on Mars" is an objective claim because a. only science can determine whether it is true or false. b. its truth or falsity cannot be known. c. whether it is true or false is independent of people thinking it is true or false. Correct d. it has been expressed in a declarative sentence—a sentence that is either true or false.
a. Whether it is true or false is independent of people thinking it is true or false
downplayer
an expression used to play down or diminish the importance of something
weasler
an expression used to protect a claim from criticism by weakening or qualifying it
Hyperbole
an extravagant overstatement or exaggeration.
What are stylistic variants of the word ''and''?
and but yet however moreover while even though nevertheless
Sarah Palin says that the only way to fix politics in Washington is to remove the power of lobbyists to influence laws. -Look man, Sarah Palin is an idiot, so that can't be right.
attacking the person
pseudoreasoning: ad hominem
attacking the person making the claim or argument rather than attacking the claim or argument. Types of ad hominem include: circumstantial, personal attack, pseudo refutation, poisoning the well, genetic fallacy
Demagogues
use extreme rhetoric to spread false ideas and to gain power over people.
words that indicate a downplayer
but, nevertheless, still, however, although
ridicule and sarcasm
use vicious humour to laugh at the expense of another person and/or their position
Whether Moore is taller than Parker is: a. a subjective issue. b. a subjective claim. c. an objective issue. d. an objective claim.
c. an objective issue.
Explanations
used to evaluate (clarify) something; provides a cause for the accepted fact
When is a claim ambiguous?
when it can have more than one posible meaning and one is unsure which is intended
which claim has initial plausibility and does not rely on bias, misinformation, or further evidence? a. all news from cable is controlled by advertisers b. the universe was created by the Big Bang c. all people from Asia are short d. certain species of turtles come to land to give birth
d. certain species of turtles come to land to give birth
a movie can be considered a (n) a. argument b. premise c. conclusion d. none of the above
d. none of the above
ethos ad
displays product being used/ endorsed by ppl we admire, identify with or feel we can trust. Goal is to make us remember product when shopping/ positive association
otherising
divides people into an us and them mentality.
The premises of a good inductive argument
doesn't demonstrate its conclusion, it supports it.
If you have good reasons to believe that an expert is biased, you should
doubt this claim
Which choice best typifies the rhetorical strategy used in the following sentence? Sentence: There, there; it could be worse.
downplayer
conjunct
each of the component statements of the conjunction; one of 2 simple statements joined by a connective to form a compound statement
disjunct
each statement in a disjunction; a simple statement that is a component of a disjunction
credibility of sources
education and experience are often the most important factors
We can form reliable judgements about a persons knowledge by considering his/her
education, experience, accomplishments, reputation and position.
A claim is
either true or false
Logos ad
emphasize info about a product that advertisers hope favorably influence consumer's decision about buying product
Cathy: Ian accused president Obama of not really being a US citizen. Can you believe that? Matthew: He did? What did he say? Cathy: He said Obama's attitudes are un-American. What is Cathy doing?
equivocation
Ed: I think that Laura is a horrible person. Ian: Well that's a pretty strong claim. What is your evidence? Ed: I overheard her saying that she hopes the Patriots kill the Jets. Only horrible people wish death upon others. What did Ed do?
equivocation
Slanter: euphemism and dysphemism
euphemism: neutral or positive term used instead of one that carries a more negative association dysphemism: a neutral or negative term used instead of one that carries a more positive association
downplayer
euphenmism, dysphemism, weasler, or downplayer? - there, there; it could be worse
rationality
evaluate our thinking to come to correct conclusions
"I was late to class because my car broke down." Does because indicate a premise or explanation?
explanation
claim
expressing belief, judgement, or opinion in declarative sentence
what grounds do we judge a persons' credibility
gender, age, ethnicity, accent, mannerism, basis of the clothes a person wears
Which of the following term is vague?
genius
What is distributed in the following statement? Some people are not good athletes
good athletes
Secretaries make more money than physicians. What type of ambiguity is this?
grouping
denial
happens when we forget that wanting something to be false is irrelevant to whether it is false
As Harold is driving down the road from Glenn County to Montclair, he crosses into Salem County and notices that the pavement deteriorates. "I guess they don't keep up their roads very well in this county," he says. Which of the following best fits the scenario?
hasty generalization
argument by Anecdote
hasty generalization
What are ambiguous statements?
have more than one meaning, and it isn't clear which meaning is intended.
weaselers
help protect a claim from criticism by watering it down somewhat, weakening it, and giving the claim's author a way out in case it is challenged - words to remember: up to, some, perhaps, possibly, perhaps - example sentence: gets up to five miles per gallon
Weaselers
help protect from criticism by watering it down somewhat, weakening it, and giving the claim's author a way out in case the claim is challenged.
weaselers
help protect it from criticism by watering it down, weakening it and giving the claim's author a way out in case the claim is challenged e.g. 'up to' 10 years
overconfidence bias
holding unrealistically positive views of oneself and one's performance
third group - rhetoric
humour and exaggerated language - ridicule/sarcasm, hyperbole
moral subjectivism
idea that moral opinions are subjective
downplayer
identify any rhetorical devices in the following selections - i trust you have seen janet's file and have noticed the "university" she graduated from
rhetorical definition
identify the rhetorical device in the following passage - although it has always had a bad name in the united state, socialism is nothing more or less than the realm of economics
Symbolize the following proposition (use the first letter of each phrase or word for the variable) I will join the team if you play baseball or football.
if (b or f), then j
initial plausibility
if a claim conflicts with background information, low __________________, lean toward rejecting it unless very strong evidence can be produced on its behalf
credibility
if a claim either lacks ______________ or comes from a source that lacks _______________, it should be viewed with suspicion
sound
if an argument is valid and all its premises are true, it is _____.
Please translate the following into standard form: p unless q.
if not-q, then p
valid
if premises are true - the conclusion must follow
c
if we know that an argument is weak, then we know the conclusion a. is false b. is true c. may or may not be true
what makes x a sufficient condition for y
if x is true, then y must also be true
Horse Laugh
includes ridicule and vicious humor of all kinds.
In the proposition "he must be a hunter or a gun collector", what kind of "or" is being used?
inclusive
pathos ad
intended to arouse emotions, and stimulate positive emotion when shopping or negative emotion to make us think poorly of something/someone
Vagueness can be either
intentional or unintentional.
interested party vs disinterested party
interested party- a person who stands to gain from our believing his or her claim disinterested party - a person who has no stake in our belief or disbelief in a claim
Cognitive Bias
interfere with one's ability to think clearly
"You'll get an A in the class," she predicted. "What makes you say that?" he asked. "Because," she said, "if you get an A, then you're smart, and you are smart." is the argument:
invalid
Bob has a green truck. And some green trucks are faster than jeeps. So Bob has a vehicle that is faster than a jeep.
invalid
If p, then q q Therefore, p This argument is
invalid
if p, then q not-p Therefore not-q This argument is:
invalid
Ethos
is an appeal to ethics(reputation, accomplishments, and expertise)
Generality
is lack of specificity. The more different kinds of Xs to which the word "X" applies, the more general it is. Regarding specific words and phrases, the more different kinds of Xs to which a word applies, the more general the word "X" is. "Moore has a dog" is more general than "Moore has an otterhound." "Moore has a pet" is still more general. difference between a very general description and one with more specificity can be crucial to nearly any decision.
Subjective Claim(Opinion)
is not a factual matter; it is an expression of belief, opinion, or personal preference
Slanter: proof surrogate
is something that is offered in place of a proof, but does not constitute a proof
syntactically ambiguous
is the following claim best classified as semantically ambiguous, syntactically ambiguous, or free from ambiguity? - sign in a hotel: NO SMOKING ROOMS AVAILABLE
representative heuristics
judging the likelihood of things in terms of how well they seem to represent, or match, particular prototypes
little "t" truth
just about everything that we believe=knowledge; can be changed in the sense of understanding.
Ampliativity
net gain in knowledge
which type of rhetoric is least affect when trying to persuade an audience?
logos
rationalizing
lying to ourselves about our real reasons for believing or doing something - often confused with wishful thinking
symbolic logic
modern deductive logic that uses symbolic language to do its work
If p, then q not-q Therefore, not-p What is this argument?
modus tollens
moral value judgement vs. non-moral value judgement
moral value judgement - judging the morality of something non-moral value judgement - "a movie is pretty good" "pepsi is better than coke"
Interested parties should always be viewed with
more suspicion than disinterested parties
Dependent Reasoning
multiple claims needed to be put together to give reason to believe conclusion
If we know that a valid argument has true premises, then the argument
must be sound
"They say Japanese carmakers put out the best cars in the world, all things considered. But that can't be right—the Toyota I bought last year had to be returned to the shop five times!" The sample is
my Toyota.
In the conditional "if p, then q" q is
necessary for p
What is distributed in the statement "Some people are lucky"?
neither
disruption
no verdict.
credibility
not an all-or-nothing thing
overlooking the possibility of coincidence
not necessarily a fallacy to think that one might be causative. It is a fallacy to think that the juxtaposition in and of itself establishes that one is causative.
You are rationally justified in accepting the view of the majority of experts in a given subject even if this view turns out later to have been incorrect.
true
What is distributed in the following: Some people never quit
quitters
deduction
reasoning from general to specific
induction
reasoning from specific to general
whether a subjective claim is true or false is dependent on whether people think it is true or false. true or false?
true
imperative sentence
sentence used to command or enjoin
true
true of false? - if a valid argument has a false conclusion, then not all its premises can be true
The main purpose of an argument is to
show that the conclusion of the argument is true
Issue
simply a question
Which of the following is NOT a conclusion indicator
since
Premise indicators (often occur just AFTER a conclusion has been given)
since, for, in view of, this is implied by
Sources like Wikipedia, institutional websites, and news organizations can be helpful, but
skepticism is the order of the day when we obtain information from unknown internet sources or talk radio.
first group- rhetoric
slanters - euphemisms, dysphemisms, weaselers, downplayers
When you are nice to children, they won't respect your authority. And if they don't respect your authority, they will do whatever they want. Eventually, they will end up committing crimes because they just don't care. So don't be nice to children.
slippery slope
Belief
something you believe in (judgement or opinion); can be stated in a declarative sentence
An argument is ___________ if it is valid and all its premises are true.
sound
Fill in blank: When the premise of a valid argument are true, the argument is said to be ____
sound
ethical egoism
the moral doctrine that the rightness of an act is determined by the happiness it produces for oneself
virtue ethics
the moral position unified around the basic idea that each of us should try to perfect a virtuous character that we exhibit in all actions
The less initial plausibility a claim has, the more extraordinary it seems, and the less it fits with our background information
the more suspicious we should be
genetic fallacy
the origin of a contention in and of itself automatically renders it false. A view should be rejected simply because of its origin
Conclusion
the point that the author is trying to prove based on the given facts
What is emotive meaning, and what is it also known as?
the positive or negative associations of an expression; rhetorical force.
in a valid deductive argument, it is impossible for
the premise to be true and the conclusion to be false
issue
the question that the argument tries to settle. It may be found by going to the conclusion of the argument and placing the word "whether" in front of it.
Premise
the reason or reasons for accepting the conclusion in an argument
moral relativism
the view that what is morally right and wrong depends on and is determined by ones group or culture
Which of the following claims is synatically ambiguous?
they fed her rat poison
lexical definitions
they tell us what the word ordinarily means we often look it up in a dictionary
critical thinking involves
thinking about thinking
mistaken appeal to common practice
try to justify a practice on the grounds that it is traditional. Tradition doesn't justify a practice.
Persuasion attempts to:
win someone's point of view.
premise indicators
words like: since, because, for
Rank the following claims from general (1) to least vague (4).
you can do it
Examples of Subjective Claims
"Barack Obama is one cool daddy" or "Rice vinegar is too sweet".
Unclear on Everything:
"Half this game is ninety percent mental."
A
"It may be true that people, not guns, kill people. But people with guns kill more people than people without guns. As long as the number of lethal weapons in the hands of the American people continues to grow, so will the murder rate."
Which of the following is an argument?
"You won't pass the test. Why am I so sure? That's because you need to know calculus to pass the test, but you haven't learned calculus yet."
pseudoreasoning: appeal to belief
"____ must be true because everybody thinks it's true."
cum hoc
"with that, therefore because of that"
cum hoc, ergo propter hoc
"with this, therefore because of it" - two events happen at around the same time establishes that one caused the other. Fair enough to think it might be the case, but not sufficient to draw this conclusion definitively.
Under what circumstances is a disjunction true (or false)--inclusive sense? (truth table definition of the connective)
(always assume inclusive sense) -for a disjunction to be true, only 1 of the disjuncts must be true (A disjunction is true even if one of the disjuncts is false) -The disjunction is false only if both disjuncts are false. (p v q is false only if both p and q are false)
line-drawing fallacy
(other version of false dilemma fallacy) occurs when a person assumes that either a crystal-clear line can be drawn between two things or else there is no difference between them - example: you cannot say when a video game is too violent; therefore, video games are not violent
argumentum ad hominem
(type of red herring) you commit this fallacy if you think you dismiss someone's position (idea, claim, proposal, argument) by dismissing them - most common fallacy
persuasion through visual imagery
- Images affect emotions - used more commonly than reasoned argument - used in politics and advertising - music or sounds in a video enhances its persuasive powers - A picture is non-propositional: neither true nor false - It is the information documented in it that carries weight - focus on the informational content to defend against being swayed by photographic rhetoric. - can be faked or altered just as information and supporting evidence can
what can bias our perception?
- Prior beliefs - Expectations - Motivational Factors - Hopes, desires, emotional attachments - Context
sources of obscurity in a claim (3)
- excessive vagueness - ambiguity - undefined terms
Stipulative Definition
- introduce a new term - series of things put together and given a name - Can't be true or false (for the purpose of) Ex. letter represented by symbol
Precising definition
- sharpens an existing definition to eliminate vagueness while remaining true to original definition
Principles of persuasive writing
- strongest argument should be presented first - if opposition's argument is good, you should concede it is good
propositional logic
-AKA truth-functional logic -the branch of deductive reasoning that deals with the logical relationships among statements. -uses symbols to stand not just for the statements but also for the relationship between statements--that is, to indicate the form of an argument. These relationships are specified & made possible by logical connectives (if-then,and,or, not). Propositional logic gets this work done by using the symbol language of symbolic logic. -helps us assess the validity of an argument w/o being distracted by nonformal elements such as the language used to express the content
Advertising
-Ads that don't rely on reasons fall into 3 categories: 1) Those that bring out FEELINGS in us 2) Those that depict the product being used or endorsed by PEOPLE we admire or think of ourselves being like 3) Those that depict the product being used in SITUATIONS in which we would like to find ourselves in -Are perfect example as of Interested Parties
Clarity of language
-Extremely important to the ability to think critically -Can often be lost as a result of multiple causes, including, importantly, vagueness, ambiguity, and generality
If p is Leo sings the blues and q is Fat sings the blues, what distinction is made involving parenthesis? ~q v ~r
-either Leo doesn't sing the blues or Fat doesn't sing the blues -says it is not the case that Leo AND Fat sing the blues
What are the 2 areas in which we assess credibility?
1) Claims 2) Claims' Sources
What are the symbols for, and the meaning of, the 5 logical connectives?
1) conjunction (and), &, p& q 2.) disjunction (or), v, p v q 3.) negation (not), ~, ~p 4.) conditional (if-then), -->, p -->q 5.) biconditional (if and only if/ just in case/ is necessary/sufficient for/ if P, then Q;and if Q, then P) <-->, p<-->q
An argumentive essay genrally has four components:
1. A statement of the issue 2. A statement of one's position on that issue 3. Arguments that support one's position 4. Rebuttals of arguments that support contrary positions
When evaluating argument look at: (4 things)
1. Arguer's Intent 2. Structure Test 2. Content Test 3. Ampliativity
Credibility
1. Claims themselves 2. Claims' sources
Describe the short method: step by step.
1.) Write out the symbolized argument in a single row 2.) assign truth values to the VARIABLES in the conclusion to make the conclusion false. (Write the appropriate Ts and Fs below the row).Assign these truth values to the same variables elsewhere 3.) consistently assign truth values to variables in the premises (to make the premises true). Assign truth values first to premises where specific truth values are ''locked in'' 4.) try to make the assignments that yield a false conclusion and true premises. If you can, the argument is invalid. If not, the argument is valid.
2 types of symbols used to express an argument
1.) variables=they're the letters or symbols used to represent /express a statement 2.) the symbols for the logical connectives that indicate relationships between statements (&, v, ~, -->)
Good Writting
1.At some stage after the first draft, outline what you have written. Then, make certain the outline is logical and that every sentence in the essay fits into the outline as it should. Some writers create an informal outline before they begin, but many do not. Our advice: Just identify the issue and your position on it, and start writing by stating them both. 2.Revise your work. Revising is the secret to good writing. Even major-league writers revise what they write, and they revise continuously Have someone else read your essay and offer criticisms of it. Revise as required. 4.If you have trouble with grammar or punctuation, reading your essay out loud may help you detect problems your eyes have missed. 5.After you are completely satisfied with the essay, put it aside. Then, come back to it later for still further revisions.
pseudoscience
A fake or false science that makes claims based on little or no scientific evidence, while masquerading as scientific in premise and conclusion.
circular reasoning
A fallacy in which the argument repeats the claim as a way to provide evidence.
Grouping ambiguity
A kind of semantic ambiguity in which it is unclear whether a claim refers to a group pf things taken individually or collectively
What is the problem with the following argument? The problem with the death penalty is that we use it to often. Typically, people who get the death penalty are people who break marijuana laws or forget to pay their taxes. And these aren't things we should kill people over. Therefore, the way we apply the death penalty in this country is wrong.
A lack of factual strength
Interested Party
A person who stands to gain from our belief in a claim. Persons viewed with more suspicion.
Issue
A point that is or might be disputed, debated, or wondered about. Is essentially a question.
Conclusion
A position on an issue supported by reasons
in-group bias
A predisposition to find fault with outsiders. Holding negative opinions about people or who don't fit in with our group or group standards.
False Dilemma
A speaker tries to establish a conclusion by offering it as the only alternative to something we will find unacceptable, unattainable, or implausible.
Experts
An expert in one field does not qualify them to be an expert in other fields. Having the ability to be an expert is not the same as actually being an expert.
Unstated premises
Are common in real life because sometimes they seem too obvious to need mentioning Example: Stated premise: The wind is from the south. Unstated premise: Around here, south winds are usually followed by rain. Conclusion: There will be rain. speaker was merely trying to show that rain was a good possibility the speaker's thinking is deductive: It isn't possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. So one might wonder abstractly what the speaker intended—an inductive argument that supports the belief that rain is coming, or a deductive demonstration Often it is clear that the speaker does have a deductive argument in mind and has left some appropriate premise unstated So context and content often make it clear what unstated premise a speaker has in mind and whether the argument is deductive or inductive
A or N/A: In 1976, Washington, D.C., passed an ordinance prohibiting private ownership of firearms. Since then, Washington's murder rate has shot up 121 percent. Bans on firearms are clearly counterproductive.
Argument
A or N/A: June 1970: A Miami man gets thirty days in the stockade for wearing a flag patch on the seat of his trousers. March 1991: Miami department stores are selling boxer trunks made up to look like an American flag. Times have changed.
Argument
Determine whether the following passages are (or contains) an argument: You'd better not pet that dog. She looks friendly, but she's been known to bite.
Argument
E or A: I told you Collins was ill. Just look at her color.
Argument
For a critical thinker, the biggest problem with rhetorical or persuasive definitions is that they A. are too subtle and complex. B. attempt to influence beliefs. C. are usually incomplete. D. do not sufficiently reduce vagueness.
B. attempt to influence beliefs.
Pathos
Being persuaded by a speaker's ability to connect personally with audience by arousing and appealing to emotions (through use of rhetoric)
problem with belief related biases
Belief Bias, Confirmation Bias, Belief Perseverance We think that we're making a judgement based on a complete body of evidence, when the body of evidence we're considering has actually been filtered and skewed by our prior beliefs.
If the Lambda Xi's continue to throw those open parties, they're going to get cited by the police. So if they continue the parties, they'll get decertified by the university because the university will certainly decertify them if they're cited by the police.
Chain argument
Validity
Concept of deductive logic, An argument is valid if it isn't possible for the premise (or premises) to be true and the conclusion false If the premise were true, the conclusion could not be false—and that's what "valid" means.
"So" indicates
Conclusion
Chain Argument
Conclusion to one argument is a premise to another (sub conclusion)
Dogs are smarter than cats because it is easier to train them.
Conclusion: Dogs are smarter than cats
When blue jays are breeding, they become aggressive. Consequently, scrub jays, which are very similar to blue jays, can also be expected to be aggressive when they're breeding.
Conclusion: Scrub jays can be expected to be aggressive when they're breeding
All of my books are used and Some of my books are not used are:
Contradictories
Identify any fallacies in the following passage: "Burger King prices are a rip-off! I can get much better food at Subway!" A. Misplaced Burden of Proof B. Perfectionist Fallacy C. Scare Tactics D. Irrelevant Conclusion E. Poisoning the Well
D. Irrelevant Conclusion
Arguments whose premises are intended to provide absolutely conclusive reasons for accepting the conclusion are
Deductive (Premise provides power reasoning)
Difference between deductive and inductive arguments
Deductive arguments try to PROVE or DEMONSTRATE a conclusion. Inductive arguments try to SUPPORT a conclusion.
How to tell if reasoning is deductive or inductive?
Deductive reasoning moves from a general premise to a more specific conclusion. Inductive reasoning moves from specific premises to a general conclusion.
If the Saints win the Super Bowl again, it will be poetic justice for New Orleans, the country's most bad-luck city in recent years. Unfortunately, the Saints have no chance to repeat the win, so there'll be no poetic justice this year for "N'awlins."
Denying the antecedent
Belief
Descriptive thought that a person holds about something a person's judgment or opinion about something.
Rules of Good Writing Style
Don't forget these rules of good style: 1.Avoid clichés like the plague. 2.Be more or less specific. 3.NEVER generalize. 4.The passive voice is to be ignored. 5.Never, ever be redundant. 6.Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement. 7.Make sure verbs agrees with their subjects. 8.Why use rhetorical questions? 9.Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary. 10.Proofread carefully to see if you any words out. 11.And it's usually a bad idea to start a sentence with a conjunction.
Doubts about sources generally fall into 2 categories
Doubts about the source's knowledge or expertise and doubts about the source's veracity,objectivity and accuracy
We need to stop eating animal flesh.
Dysphemism
What kind of a statement is "Tall people are not good at being jockeys"?
E
What kind of statement is "No one who lives here is difficult to be around"?
E
What kind of statement is the following: No carpenters are bad at math.
E
Equivocation
Equivocation (also known as: doublespeak) Description: Using an ambiguous term in more than one sense, thus making an argument misleading. Example #1: I want to have myself a merry little Christmas, but I refuse to do as the song suggests and make the yuletide gay. I don't think sexual preference should have anything to do with enjoying the holiday. Explanation: The word, "gay" is meant to be in light spirits, joyful, and merry, not in the homosexual sense. Example #2: The priest told me I should have faith. I have faith that my son will do well in school this year. Therefore, the priest should be happy with me. Explanation: The term "faith" used by the priest, was in the religious sense of believing in God without sufficient evidence, which is different from having "faith" in your son in which years of good past performance leads to the "faith" you might have in your son. Exception: Equivocation works great when deliberate attempts at humor are being made. Tip: When you suspect equivocation, substitute the word with the same definition for all uses and see if it makes sense.
4 Sources of Confusion
Excessive vagueness Ambiguity Excessive generality Undefined terms
"X because Y"
Explains use "because" to explain the cause. Arguments use "because" as evidence to support a claim. When what follows "because" is a reason for accepting a contention, it is an ARGUMENT. When it states the cause of something, it is a cause/effect explanation.
A or E? "Lucy is too short to reach the bottom of the sign."
Explanation
E or A: The reason collins was ill is that she ate and drank more than she should have.
Explanation
Defenders of the harm principle usually believe that it is only one among several acceptable justifications for laws forbidding conduct.
False
Ethical egoism discounts one's own happiness as of lesser value than the happiness of others.
False
Every invalid argument has a false conclusion
False
Identifying the issue is very simple in all real-life situations. A. True B. False
False
If an argument has a false conclusion it is invalid.
False
If the conclusion of a valid argument is true, the premises must be true as well.
False
Immanuel Kant's deontologism urges people to act so as to produce the most happiness.
False
In recent years, the media have become controlled by thousands of independent outlets. A. True B. False
False
Inductive arguments are evaluated with the terms "valid" and "invalid." True or False?
False
No invalid arguments have a false conclusion
False
No unsound arguments have a true conclusion
False
Precising definitions reduce ambiguity or vagueness by creating a new definition for a given term. True or False?
False
Stare decisis is the doctrine that even though a court has pronounced a principle of law applicable to a certain set of facts, other judges should follow common sense in determining whether to apply that principle to other cases in which the facts are substantially the same.
False
T/F Reference works such as dictionaries are utterly reliable sources of information --- they do not contain any mistakes.
False
True or False. A valid argument can have true premises and a false conclusion
False
True or False. You can have a sound argument with a false conclusion.
False
True or False. You can have a sound argument with a false premise.
False
True or False. You can have a valid argument with all true premises and a false conclusion.
False
Why do you think that this is the best cell phone on the market? -I saw a commercial where Tom Brady said it is the best one out there.
False authority
If the conclusion of a valid argument is false, then all of its premises are false as well
False--at least one not all
Aristotle
Father of logic, biology, and psychology, made enduring contributions to virtually every subject. These include (in addition to those just mentioned) physics, astronomy, meteorology, zoology, metaphysics, political science, economics, ethics, and rhetoric. Among Aristotle's contributions in the last field (rhetoric) was a theory of persuasion
Definitions
First, definitions should not prejudice the case against one side of a debate or the other. This is one form of begging the question Second, definitions should be clear. They are designed to clear the air, not muddy the water. This means they should be expressed in language that is as clear and simple as the subject will allow Realize that sometimes you must get along with incomplete definitions. In real life, we sometimes have to deal with claims that include such big-league abstractions as friendship, loyalty, fair play, freedom, rights, and so forth. If you have to give a complete definition of "freedom" or "fair play," you'd best not plan on getting home early. Such concepts have subtle and complex parameters
Evaluating arguments has two parts
First, there is the logic part: Does the argument either demonstrate or support its conclusion? Is this argument either deductively valid or inductively relatively strong? The other part, of course, is the truth part. Are the premises actually true?
Definition by synonym
Giving another word or phrase that means the same as the term being defined. "'Fastidious' means the same as 'fussy.'" "'Pulsatile' means 'throbbing.'" "To be 'lubricious' is the same as to be 'slippery.'"
Definition by Synonym:
Giving another word or phrase that means the same as the term being defined. EX: "Fastidious means the same as fussy" or "Pulsatile means throbbing".
In the following argument: "I think people aren't compassionate enough. If they were, they'd give more to charity." What can we know about the second sentence?
Giving more to charity is implied by being compassionate enough.
Hasty Generalization
Hasty Generalization (also known as: argument from small numbers, statistics of small numbers, insufficient statistics, unrepresentative sample [form of], argument by generalization, faulty generalization, hasty conclusion [form of], inductive generalization, insufficient sample, lonely fact fallacy, over generality, over generalization) Description: Drawing a conclusion based on a small sample size, rather than looking at statistics that are much more in line with the typical or average situation. Logical Form: Sample S is taken from population P. Sample S is a very small part of population P. Conclusion C is drawn from sample S. Example #1: My father smoked four packs of cigarettes a day since age fourteen and lived until age sixty-nine. Therefore, smoking really can't be that bad for you. Explanation: It is extremely unreasonable (and dangerous) to draw a universal conclusion about the health risks of smoking by the case study of one man. Example #2: Four out of five dentists recommend Happy Glossy Smiley toothpaste brand. Therefore, it must be great. Explanation: It turns out that only five dentists were actually asked. When a random sampling of 1000 dentists were polled, only 20% actually recommended the brand. The four out of five result was not necessarily a biased sample or a dishonest survey, it just happened to be a statistical anomaly common among small samples. Exception: When statistics of a larger population are not available, and a decision must be made or opinion formed if the small sample size is all you have to work with, then it is better than nothing. For example, if you are strolling in the desert with a friend, and he goes to pet a cute snake, gets bitten, then dies instantly, it would not be fallacious to assume the snake is poisonous. Tip: Don't base decisions on small sample sizes when much more reliable data exists. Variation: The hasty conclusion is leaping to a conclusion without carefully considering the alternatives -- a tad different than drawing a conclusion from too small of a sample.
Inference to the Best Explanation
He said he was for the bill when it was proposed, and now he vetoes it? The only thing I can see is, he must be trying to get the urban votes?
Identifying Reasons That are Helpful in Focusing on Perception 1 Determine whether the following reasons are (1) helpful in focusing perception to elicit a favorable response, (2) helpful in focusing perception to elicit an unfavorable response, (3) too vague to focus perception, (4) false or implausible and therefore unable to focus perception, or (5) irrelevant to focusing perception. The information you need is contained in the reasons, so try to visualize or imagine what the work is like from what is said. All of these are paraphrases of testimony given at a hearing in 1985 about a proposal to remove Tilted Arc, an immense abstract sculpture, from a plaza in front of a federal office building.
Helpful in focusing perception to elicit a favorable response Irrelevant to focusing perception Helpful in focusing perception to elicit a favorable response Helpful in focusing perception to elicit an unfavorable response Helpful in focusing perception to elicit a favorable response
Introduction
Ideally, your essay should begin with an introduction to the issue that demonstrates that the issue is important or interesting. Should be a fair statement of the issue
Try to symbolize the following sentence with variables and "or", "and", or "if. . . then". Use the first letter of the words below to stand for the entire word or phrase. "Whenever I am sad and drunk I call ex-girlfriends."
If (s and d), then c
Try to symbolize the following sentence with variables and "or", "and", or "if. . . then". Use the first letter of the words below to stand for the entire word or phrase. "Whenever I am sad or drunk I call ex-girlfriends and yell."
If (s or d), then (c and y)
When is it reasonable to accept an unsupported claim?
If it does not conflict with what one observes, one's background information, or other credible claims, and comes from a credible source.
Please translate the following into standard form: When it rains it pours.
If it rains, it pours.
What is the correct way to write "unless x, y" in standard form.
If not x, then y.
Translate the following propositions into symbolic notation (use the first letter of each phrase for its variable): Pete will visit the aquarium only if janet comes too.
If p, then j
Knowledge
If you believe a claim, have an argument for it that is beyond reasonable doubt, an have no reason to think you are mistaken, you may be said to have knowledge that the claim is true.
Knowledge
If you believe something, have an argument beyond a reasonable doubt that it's so, and have no reason to think you are mistaken, you can claim you know it
What statement is equivalent to "Unless you take your vitamins, you won't grow big and strong."
If you don't take your vitamins, you won't grow big and strong.
What is the appropriate translation of the following in standard form: "You are going to fail the class unless you stop goofing off."
If you goof off, then you will fail the class.
Please translate the following into standard form: You can have dessert unless you aren't hungry.
If you're hungry, you can have desert.
The Glancing Blow. (bad)
In this type of essay, writers address an issue obliquely. If they are supposed to evaluate the health benefits of bicycling, they will bury the topic in an essay on the history of cycling; if they are supposed to address the history of cycling, they will talk about the benefits of riding bicycles throughout history.
The Knee-Jerk Reaction.(bad)
In this type of essay, writers record their first reaction to an issue without considering the issue in any depth or detail. It always shows.
"No one has lived up to 150 years old. So I won't live up to 150 years old." Is this argument deductive or inductive?
Inductive
Eric must be very smart. How do I know? I have met both of his parents and they are very intelligent. That's how I know." Is this argument deductive or inductive?
Inductive
Fill in blank: Arguments whose remains are intended to provide some support but less than absolutely conclusive support for the the conclusion are ______
Inductive
The following is an example of what type of argument: I have experienced 1,000,000 swans and all were white. Therefore, all swans are white.
Inductive
Isolate and discuss the rhetorical devices that appear in the following passage: With her keen instinct for political survival on full alert, Governor Whitman suddenly saw the wisdom of the proposal that she had opposed for so many years. A. Weaseler B. Innuendo C. Downplayer D. None of the Above E. All of the Above
Innuendo—insinuates that her changed mind on the proposal was politically motivated and unprincipled.
Irrelevant Conclusion
Irrelevant Conclusion Finally, the fallacy of the irrelevant conclusion tries to establish the truth of a proposition by offering an argument that actually provides support for an entirely different conclusion. Person A: "If drugs were legalised criminals wouldn't be able to sell them anymore due to competition from legal sources. Drug wars and other drug related crime would be reduced and less people killed as a result. Keeping drugs illegal causes more problems than it solves." Person B: "Yeah, but people would still find something else to kill each other over." In the example above Person B has committed the ignoratio elenchi fallacy. Their point about people killing for reasons other than drugs, while perhaps true, is unrelated to whether drugs should be legal or not. It does not address the points made by Person A.
Criteria for evaluating comparative claims?
Is any important information missing? Is the same standard of comparison being used? Are the same recording and reporting practices being used? Are the items comparable? Beware of statistics, particularly averages.
Moral Subjectivism
Is the idea that all judgments and claims that ascribe a moral property to something are subjective. "There is nothing either good or bad but that thinking makes it so." -Hamlet.
Moral subjectivism
Is the idea that what is right and wrong is merely a matter of subjective opinion, that thinking some this is right or wrong makes it right or wrong for that individual.
Critical thinking
It happens when we evaluate the thinking, that has been used in coming to a conclusion.
"They say Japanese carmakers put out the best cars in the world, all things considered. But that can't be right—the Toyota I bought last year had to be returned to the shop five times!" The population is
Japanese cars
A
June 1970: A Miami man gets thirty days in the stockade for wearing a flag patch on the seat of his trousers. March 1991: Miami department stores are selling boxer trunks made up to look like an American flag. Tines have changed.
Not all claims are sentences, and not all sentences are claims, but sentences can express claims. Give example of each.
Just claim: 2 + 3 = 5 Just sentence: Are you hungry? Both: I am hungry
What is inference?
Knowing something by tracing it's connection with a sign or indicator.
Claims
Lack credibility to the extent they conflict with our observations, experience, or background information, or come from sources that lack credibility
What is wrong with this argument? She could be in her home, at the park, or in the office. But she's not at home, so she must be in the office.
Lack of logical strength
Generality
Lack of specificity The more different kinds of X's to which a word applies, the more general the word X is. Ex. "Moore has a pet"
Generality
Lack of specificity. Ex: Learning that Clarence has an arrest record (general) vs. learning that Clarence has been arrested during a protest against a company that was polluting the local river (more specific).
NA
Levi's Dockers are still in style, but pleats are out.
Tell us what a word means
Lexical Definitions: tells us what the word ordinarily means (dictionary)
Identify any fallacies in the following passage: All this talk about secondhand smoke causing cancer, I just don't get it. How does it happen? WHEN does it happen? The first time you take a breath in a smoky room? The second time? The third? You can never pin it down exactly. A. Ad hominem (inconsistency) B. Straw Man C. Line Drawing D. None of the Above E. All of the Above
Line-drawing fallacy (assuming the conclusion is that indirect smoking doesn't cause cancer).
Identify any fallacies in the following passage: You show me when an embryo becomes a human person, just show me! Tell me exactly when it is. When it's just an egg, the size of a pin head? When it divides once? Twice? Three times? When? Where you gonna draw the line? An embryo is not a person, and that's that. A. Ad hominem (inconsistency) B. Straw Man C. Line Drawing D. None of the Above E. All of the Above
Line-drawing fallacy.
"The legal drinking age should be increased. I'll bet you can't think of a reason not to." Which of the following fallacies is present in this statement?
Misplacing the burden of proof
All human beings are mortal. Is in standard-form categorical claim?
No
Determine whether the following passage is (or contains) an argument. "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question." —John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism a. Argument b. No Argument
No Argument
Determine whether the following passage is (or contains) an argument. "The main danger of war, even of a war fought with conventional weapons, lies in its unpredictability." —Anatoly Gromyko, "Security for All in the Nuclear Age," in Breakthrough a. Argument b. No Argument
No Argument
Determine whether the following passage is (or contains) an argument. "The recent failure of a Drake University student to halt his former girlfriend's plan for an abortion focuses light on a seldom considered situation: While a woman's right to an abortion should not be weakened, the idea of 'fathers' rights' raised in this case should be discussed." —The Daily Iowan a. Argument b. No Argument
No Argument
A or N/A: Levi's Dockers are still in style, but pleats are out.
Non-argument
I like vanilla ice cream. Is it subjective
Not subjective
Unstated conclusions
Not uncommon, though they are less common than unstated premises
Translate "Frank is not a good comedian" into standard form.
Nothing in the class of Frank is a good comedian.
S or O? "There is life on Mars."
Objective
Argument consists of two parts
One part, the premise, is intended to provide a reason for accepting the second part, the conclusion Example: God exists because something had to cause the universe. premise ("something had to cause the universe") conclusion ("God exists") both parts are propositional entities, which means (to repeat) that both parts must be expressible in a declarative, true-or-false sentence
Argumentative essay
One takes a position on an issue and supports it with argument four parts: a statement of the issue, a statement of one's position on that issue, arguments that support one's position, and rebuttals of arguments that support contrary positions
An 'electric currant' flows in a circuit if and only if an ammeter connected in series with the circuit shows a reading. This is an example of a(n) _______definition.
Operational
Objective Opinion/Belief/Claim=
Opinion/Belief/Claim whose truth is independent of whether anyone thinks it is true.
____. Consequently, ____, give that ____ and ____
P, C, P, P
Since ____ and ____, _____.
P, P, C
___, and ___. Therefore, ___
P, P, C
____. So, since ____, ____.
P, P, C
material implication
P-->Q is equivalent to ~P v Q
contraposition
P-->Q is equivalent to ~Q --> ~P
In the following argument: "I think people aren't compassionate enough. If they were, they'd give more to charity." What is the implicit premise?
People don't give more in charity.
"Fact vs. Opinion"
People sometimes refer to true objective claims as "facts," and use the word "opinion" to designate any claim that is subjective.
Jimmi has a gentle soul; if there is a heaven, he should go to it when he dies.
People with gentle souls go to heaven.
Persuasiveness
Persuasiveness of an argument is a subjective question of psychology, not of logic The individual who does not think critically is precisely the person who is persuaded by specious reasoning People notoriously are unfazed by good arguments while finding even the worst arguments compelling. If you want to persuade people of something, try propaganda. Flattery has been known to work, too Modes of persuasion—what Aristotle called ethos and pathos Whenever you find yourself being persuaded by what someone says, find the "logos" in the "pathos," and be persuaded by it alone.
What arguments are not
Pictures are not premises, conclusions, or arguments. Neither are movies. Your iPhone can do lots of things, but it can't create a premise, a conclusion, or an argument emotions, feelings, landscapes, faces, gestures, grunts, groans, bribes, threats, amusement parks, and hip-hop causes are not premises "If ... then ..." sentences are not arguments Although they (statements) are related by being about the same subject, none of these claims is offered as a reason for believing another, and thus there is no argument here
Popularity/Bandwagon
Popularity/Bandwagon (also known as: bandwagon argument, peer pressure) Description: Using the popularity of a premise or proposition as evidence for its truthfulness. This is a fallacy which is very difficult to spot because our "common sense" tells us that if something is popular, it must be good/true/valid, but this is not so, especially in a society where clever marketing, social and political weight, and money can buy popularity. Logical Form: Everybody is doing X. Therefore, X must be the right thing to do. Example #1: Mormonism is one of the fastest growing sects of Christianity today so that whole story about Joseph Smith getting the golden plates that, unfortunately, disappeared back into heaven, must be true! Explanation: Mormonism is indeed rapidly growing, but that fact does not prove the truth claims made by Mormonism in any way. Example #2: A 2005 Gallup Poll found that an estimated 25% of Americans over the age of 18 believe in astrology—or that the position of the stars and planets can affect people's lives. That is roughly 75,000,000 people. Therefore, there must be some truth to astrology! Explanation: No, the popularity of the belief in astrology is not related to the truthfulness of astrological claims. Beliefs are often cultural memes that get passed on from person to person based on many factors other than truth. Exception: When the claim being made is about the popularity or some related attribute that is a direct result of its popularity. People seem to love the movie, The Shawshank Redemption. In fact, it is currently ranked #1 at IMDB.com, based on viewer ratings. Tip: Avoid this fallacy like you avoid a kiss from your great aunt with the big cold sore on her lip. Variation: The bandwagon effect is a related cognitive bias that demonstrates people tend to believe and do things because many other people do, as well. This is also referred to as "herd behavior" and "groupthink".
Definition by example (ostensive definition)
Pointing to, naming, or otherwise identifying one or more examples of the sort of thing to which the term applies: "By 'scripture,' I mean writings like the Bible and the Koran." "A mouse is this thing here, the one with the buttons."
Unstated premises
Premise that is unstated
Seventy percent of freshmen at State College come from wealthy families; therefore, probably about the same percentage of all State College students come from wealthy families.
Premise: Seventy percent of freshmen at State College come from wealthy families Conclusion: About the same percentage of all State College students come from wealthy families
That cat is used to dogs. Probably she won't be upset if you bring home a new dog for a pet.
Premise: That cat is used to dogs Conclusion: Probably she won't be upset if you bring home a new dog for a pet
That cat is used to dogs. Probably she won't be upset if you bring home a new dog for a pet.
Premise: That cat is used to dogs Conclusion: Probably she won't be upset if you bring home a new dog for a pet
Euphemism
Replace a term with something that makes it sound better
Loaded question
Rests on an assumption that should have been established but wasn't
Several terms can express a logical conjunction: and, but, yet, however, moreover, while, even though, nevertheless. In propositional logic, all these are logically equivalent; they are therefore properly symbolized by (&).
Several terms can express a logical conjunction: and, but, yet, however, moreover, while, even though, nevertheless. In propositional logic, all these are logically equivalent; they are therefore properly symbolized by (&).
"Going shopping is annoying. It is tons of trouble to find parking, and then you have to deal with salespeople and other customers who want to get the same things that you do." What is the conclusion of the above argument?
Shopping is annoying.
Arguments to support your position
Should be as succinct as you can make them, but it is much more important to be clear than to be brief. Heart of the essay Reasons you cite should be clearly relevant, and they should be either clearly reliable or backed up by further arguments.
Repetition
Simply making the same point over and over at every opportunity.
Deductive
Since the angles add up to 180 degrees, this one must equal 50 degrees.
Claim
Single piece of info that is either true or false. Basic building block of critical thinking and logic.
Webcheckers (most reliable)
Snopes.com, truthorfiction.com, factcheck.org, politifact.com, consumerrepots.com
Translate the following into a standard-form categorical claim: Not every product that's organic is actually a chemical-free product.
Some organic products are not chemical-free products.
If "All people are nice" is false, what must be true?
Some people are not nice.
If "All surprises are unpleasant events" is true, which of the following must also be true?
Some surprises are unpleasant events.
Complications with arguments (2)
Sometimes conclusions can be used as premises, or the premises/conclusions are unstated
When the premises of a valid argument are true, the argument is said to be
Sound
Classical is the most pleasant music
Subjective Claim
Steven Colbert's show was funnier than Jon Stewart's
Subjective Claim
What is Background Information? What does it depend on?
That immense body of justified beliefs that consist of facts we learn from our own direct observations and facts we learn from others -This assessment depends on how consistent the claim is with our Background Information--How well it "fits" with that info -If it fits very well, we give the claim some reasonable degree of Initial Plausibility---There is a reasonable expectation of it being true
NA
The Directory of International Communities lists more than tow hundred groups across the country organized around a wide variety of purposes, including environmentally aware living.
What is the truth table definition of the connective (<-->)?
The biconditional statement is true when both of its parts have the same values. So if the truth value of P is T and Q is T, then P<-->O is true. Or if the true value of P is F and Q is also F, then P<-->Q is true -If both of the parts have different values (TF/FT), then P<-->Q is false
Conclusion
The claim (position on an issue), what we are supposed to accept.
Premise
The claim or claims in an argument that provide the reasons for believing the conclusion
Premise
The claim or claims in an argument thought to support or demonstrate a conclusion.
What is an Argument?
The cognitive process of accepting or rejecting a claim based on reasons.
true
The conclusion of a sound argument is always ______.
critical thinking
The evaluation of reasoning used in coming to conclusions
semantic ambiguity.
The most obvious way is probably by containing an ambiguous word or phrase,
Deductive Arguments
The premise (or premises) of a good deductive argument, if true, proves or demonstrates (these being the same thing for our purposes) its conclusion premise of a good deductive argument, if true, demonstrates that the conclusion is true If it sounds odd to speak of the argument as providing evidence or support for a contention, that's an indication it is a deductive argument
What are the definitions of "Opinion"?
The same as a claim, thought, belief, or judgement; a subjective claim; and an unfounded objective claim
The steps you use to check validity of a 3-variable argument are the same ones you apply in a 2-variable argument. You devise a truth table, calculate truth values and check for true premises /w a false conclusion. The truth table, of course, has an additional guide column for the 3rd variable and there are more rows to accommodate the larger number of possible true-false combinations
The steps you use to check validity of a 3-variable argument are the same ones you apply in a 2-variable argument. You devise a truth table, calculate truth values and check for true premises /w a false conclusion. The truth table, of course, has an additional guide column for the 3rd variable and there are more rows to accommodate the larger number of possible true-false combinations
loss aversion
The strong tendency to regard losses as considerably more important than gains of comparable magnitude—and, with this, a tendency to take steps (including risky steps) to avoid possible loss.
What is an argument's form?
The structure of an argument that can be expressed with variables and symbols
overconfidence
The tendency to be more confident than correct when estimating the accuracy of one's beliefs and judgments - Most people believe they make excellent decisions - when we are overconfident, we misjudge our value, opinion, beliefs or abilities
Claim
The use of opinion in a declarative sentence
There are degrees of credibility and incredibility
They are NOT all-or-nothing
What are premises?
They are considerations that someone puts forth to convince someone else to accept a conclusion.
Again, what are arguments?
They have two parts, a premise part and a conclusion part, and both parts are propositional entities, meaning that they both must be expressible in a declarative, true-false sentence.
Cognitive biases
They interfere with our ability to think clearly
Number claims and diagram argument: They really ought to build a new airport. It would attract more business to the area, not to mention the fact that the old airport is overcrowded and dangerous.
They really ought to build a new airport (1). It would attract more business to the area (2), not to mention the fact that the old airport is overcrowded (3) and dangerous (4). 2 3+4 \ / 1
Rhetorical analogy
This kind of analogy has the same aims and uses some of the same devices rhetorical explanations use.
Emotive meaning or rhetorical force
This meaning consists of the positive or negative associations of a word Ex: "Government-guaranteed health care" and a "government takeover of health care"
Disinterested Parties
Those who have no stake in our belief one way or the other
Conclusion Indicators
Thus ... Therefore ... Hence ... This shows that ... This suggests that ... Consequently ... So ... Accordingly ... This implies that ... This proves that ...
With all the potential pitfalls to clear thinking/communication, what is a critically thinking person to do?
To start, we can do the best we can to be clear in what our words mean.
A claim lacks inherent credibility to the extent that what?
To the extent that it conflicts with what we have observed or what we think we know (our background info) or with other credible claims
Topic vs. Issue
Topic: Any subject of conversation - can't be true or false Issue: point of contention within topic - can be true or false
Abductive reasoning is often used to solve murder cases.
True
All sound arguments are valid arguments
True
Ampliativity comes at the expense of certainty. True or False?
True
In an Inductive Argument, a strong, cogent argument can have a false conclusion. True or False?
True
IBE, or Inference to the Best Explanation (4)
Type of inductive argument that 1) explains the phenomenon most adequately 2) leads to the most accurate predictions 3) conflicts least with other well established explanations 4) involves the fewest unnecessary assumptions
5. Let the Reader Do the Work
Type the essay and expect the reader to follow them through non sequiturs, irrelevant sidetracks, etc.
if p, then q p Therefore, q This argument is:
VAlid
Is this valid or not? If our daugher is sick, then we have to keep her home. And if we keep her home, we can't go to the conference. So, if our daughter is sick, we can't make it to the conference.
Valid
Is this valid or not? Look, she isn't home. If she was home, then there would be some lights on.
Valid
Ken always gets left out of the fun. That's why he is so shy, since people who get left out become shy.
Valid
Mike can't be a lawyer. He is afraid of public speaking, and anybody who is afraid of public speaking can't be a lawyer.
Valid
Nobody who listens to Classic rock takes Justin Beiber seriously. But some of my students take Justin Beiber seriously. So they don't listen to classic rock.
Valid
She works very hard. And nobody who works hard fails. So, she will not fail.
Valid
Some S are M All M are P So some S are P
Valid
That animal is definitely not a rabbit. Rabbits have tall ears, and that animal doesn't.
Valid
The alternator is not working properly if the ammeter shows a negative reading. The current reading of the ammeter is negative. So, the alternator is not working properly. is the argument:
Valid
The patriots are a successful franchise. Any team with three Superbowl victories is successful, and the Pats have three.
Valid
Inductive reasoning mostly represents what type of argument?
Valid, *Weak or Strong.
Deductive Structure and Content Test
Validity and soundness
With invalid arguments, the premises may be true or false, and the conclusion may be true or false: all combinations are possible
With invalid arguments, the premises may be true or false, and the conclusion may be true or false: all combinations are possible
Indicate which blanks would ordinarily contain premises and which would ordinarily contain conclusions.
________ premise and ________ premise . Therefore, ________. conclusion ________ premise . So, because ________ premise , ________. conclusion ________ conclusion , clearly. After all, ________. premise Because ________ premise and ________ premise , ________. conclusion ________. premise Consequently, ________ conclusion , because ________ premise and ________. premise
interested party
_____________________ are less credible than other sources of claims
Claim
a belief expressed in a declarative statement
background information
a body of justified beliefs that consists of facts we learn from our own direct observations and we learn from others
semantic ambiguity
a claim can be ambiguous in more than one way. the most obvious way is by containing an ambiguous word or phrase, which produces a case of _______ ________
truth
a claim is true if it is free from error
vague claim
a claim that lacks sufficient precision to convey the information appropriate to its use.
An objective claim is
a claim the truth or falsity of which is independent of whether we think it is true.
argument
a combination of at least two statements and a conclusion
Arguement
a consideration for accepting a claim
Stereotype
a cultural belief or idea about a social group's attributes, usually simplified or exemplified.
stereotype
a cultural belief or idea about a social groups attributes, usually simplified or exaggerated - positive or negative
invalid argument
a deductive argument that fails to provide logical conclusive support for its conclusion -conclusion doesn't logically follow from the premises
recognition heuristic
a higher value and preference is placed on the more easily recognised option.
Slanter: persuasive definitions, explanations, and comparisons
all are used to sway one's attitude: (1) persuasive definition - defining a term, (2) persuasive explanation: telling why something is how or so, (3) persuasive comparison: using "like" or "as"
credibility in the media
all media is subject to some biases. we tend to believe the media is biased against our side - hostile media effect
Fake and misleading images can be the result of:
all of the above
words that indicate a weasler
almost, it could be that, it is possible that
What goes for talk radio, above,
also goes for advocacy television.
if a word or phrase has two or more meanings, it is said to be __________
ambiguous
euphemism
an agreeable or inoffensive expression that is substituted for an expression that may be found unpleasant or offensive by a listener or reader
syntactically ambiguous claim
an ambiguious claim whose ambiguity is due to the structure of the claim
rhetorical analogy
an analogy used to express or influence attitudes or affect behavior; such analogies often invoke images with positive or negative emotional associations
argument from outrage
an appeal to emotion fallacy - occurs when a speaker or writer "supports" a contention by trying to make us angry rather than by producing a real argument
appeal to pity
an appeal to emotion fallacy - occurs when a speaker or writer supports a contention by playing on our sympathy rather than by producing a real argument
apple polishing
an appeal to emotion fallacy - occurs when a speaker or writer supports a contention by trying to flatter vs. real agreement
untestable explanation
an argument based on an untestable explanation, too vague or circular reasoning
logical fallacy
an argument that contains a mistake in reasoning
Synonymous Definition
another word/phrase with the same meaning used to define
fallacy of accident
assuming a general statement automatically applies to a specific case that is exceptional
pseudoreasoning: begging the question
assuming as true the very claim that is at issue
Argument is a tool for resolving disputes and must have:
at least one claim/premise and one conclusion
Ian: I support the Tea Party because they are right about the relationship between the government and private individuals. I think that it isn't the role of government redistribute people's wealth. Rather, its job is to protect individual rights. We should encourage private individuals to give in charity, but not force them too through taxation. Cathy: Well, that can't be right, since the Tea Party is full of racists and homophobes. What did Cathy do?
attacking the person
downplayers
attempt to make someone or something look less important or less significant - may be words or phrases - words to remember: so-called, just another, mere, merely, " ", nevertheless, however, still, but, although, even though
Downplayers
attempt to make someone or something look less important or less significant.
downplayers
attempt to make someone or something look less important or less significant. Stereotypes, rhetorical comparisons, rhetorical explanations and innuendo can all be used.
begging the question
attempting to 'support' a contention by offering as 'evidence' what amounts to a repackaging of the very contention in question
argumentum ad hominem
attempting to dismiss a source's position by discussing the source rather than the position
straw man
attempting to dismiss a source's position by misrepresenting it or distorting it
false dilemma
attempting to establish a point by pretending it is the only alternative to something we will find unacceptable, unattainable or implausible
misplacing the burden of proof
attempting to place the burden of proof on the wrong side of an issue. The claim having the lowest initial credibility has the burden of proof
mistaken appeal to authority
attempting to support a claim by citing a source that is not really an authority
appeal to emotion
attempting to support a contention by playing on our emotions rather than by producing a real argument
"The dry cleaner on the corner is an eyesore." This is a subjective claim because it a. is a claim. b. depends on what you think an eyesore is. c. doesn't depend on what you think an eyesore is. d. depends on what the neighbors think.
b. depends what you think an eyesore is
" I believe Aristotle's argument because he is a renowned philosopher." This is an example of: a. logos b. ethos c. pathos
b. ethos
A statement can be: a. an argument. b. the conclusion of one argument and a premise in another. c. both a premise and an argument. d. a fundamental type of reasoning.
b. the conclusion of one argument and a premise in another.
Etymological Definition
based on the origin of word
premise indicator
because, since, for, the reason that, as
The proposition "p and q" is true if and only if
both p and q are true
Reducing Cognitive Dissonance
change attitude, add consonant thoughts, change the importance of the dissonant thoughts, reduce the amount of perceived choice, change behavior
If an argument leads to a surprising result...
check the definitions!
satisficing
choosing the first sufficiently acceptable option
Meghan: Like I said, Jason, it is wrong for private citizens to own firearms. Jason: Why? Meghan: Because it's not right for them to own guns. What is Meghan doing?
circular reasoning
Which of the following is not an inductive argument type we have discussed:
circular reasoning
2 arenas in which we assess credibility
claim
background information
claim lacks inherent credibility to the extent that it conflicts with what we have observed or what we think we know- our _________________________________- or with other credible claims
just-world hypothesis
claim that our attributions and behaviors are shaped by a deep-seated assumption that the world is fair and all things happen for a reason
psuedoreasoning: appeal to the consequences of belief
claims are true or false independent of the consequences of them being true or false.
if p, then q not-p Therefore, not-q What is this argument
denying the antecedent
importance of domain suffixes
determining the credibility of a website e.g. .edu, .gov
Balance of considerations
determining which option is best (Pros and Cons)
We can consider sources objective if they are _________
disinterested parties
In "p or r", p and r are called
disjuncts
poisoning the well
dismiss what someone is going to say by talking about the person's consistency or character or circumstances - a pre-emptive strike
rhetorical definition
employ rhetorically charged language to express or elicit an attitude about something - example sentence: defining abortion as, "the murder of an unborn human being"
downplayer
euphenmism, dysphemism, weasler, or downplayer? - "it does not say in the Constitution this idea of a separation of church and state."
moral principle vs. moral reasoning
ex: "you should be kind to animals" ex: "if all x's are y's, then if this thing is an x, then it is a y"
source of claim vs content of claim
ex: if we are told ducks can talk, we dismiss the claim immediately - lacks credibility regardless of source - but the claim ducks mate for life is not as crazy. whether we believe it or not depends on if we hear it from a bird expert or a guy on the street.
A pathos advertisement can provide people with information that can clinch their decision to make a purchase.
false
Fill in blank: A valid argument cannot have any ___ premises
false
Having true premises and a true conclusion is a sufficient condition for having a sound deductive argument
false
If you have reason to believe that an expert is biased, you should reject that expert's claim as false.
false
Reference works such as dictionaries are utterly reliable sources of information—otherwise they wouldn't be reference works.
false
beyond a reasonable doubt is a type of deductive proof. True or false?
false
Jonathan: I think I should get a divorce. Matthew: Why? Jonathan: Because my wife and I get into fights sometimes, and you can either keep getting into fights or just get a divorce. What did Jonathan do?
false dilemma
deductive
from general to general - from general to particular
inductive
from particular to general - from general to particular
biased generalizing
generalizing from a sample that would probably be atypical no matter how large it might be - under represents
Self-Selection Fallacy
generalizing from exceptional cases
Fallacy of Small Sample
hasty generalization
Fallacy of the Lonely Fact
hasty generalization
no rhetorical device
idenify the rhetorical device in the following passage - it is fair to say that, compared with most people his age, mr. beechler is pretty much bald
moral reasoning principle 2
if someone appears to be violating the consistency principle, then the burden of proof is on that person to show that he or she is in fact not violating the principle. ex: blue eyed students can take tests with books open, but nobody else can - has to show there is something about having blue eyes that entitles that
overlooking the possibility of regression
if the average value of a variable is atypical on one measurement, it is likely to be less atypical on a subsequent measurement. Regression to the statistical mean. Trials can be misused to skew data - given the researchers know the next attempt will result in a better outcome.
knowledge
if you believe in something, have an argument beyond a reasonable doubt that it is so, and have no reason to think you are mistaken, you can claim you know it
deductive
if you try to demonstrate or prove a conclusion, you are using __________ reasoning
loaded questions - rhetoric
implies something without saying it directly - "Why does the President hate rich people?"
Accomplishments
important indicator if directly related to the question at hand
consequentialism
in moral reasoning, the view that the consequences of a decision, deed, or policy determine its moral value - utilitarianism is a version
deductive
in order to be valid, a sound argument has to be _____.
Attempting to dismiss a source's position because of the source's alleged hypocrisy
inconsistency ad hominem
deductive
inductive or deductive? - all mammals are warm-blooded creatures, and all whales are mammals. therefore, all whales are warm-blooded creatures
inductive
inductive or deductive? - i have never met a golden retriever with a nasty disposition. i bet there are not any
deductive
inductive or deductive? - no mayten tree is deciduous, and all non-deciduous trees are evergreens. it follows that all mayten trees are evergreens
inductive
inductive or deductive? - obama will make a fine president. after all, he made a fine senator
The picnic scheduled in the park tomorrow will most likely be canceled. It's been snowing for six days straight.
inductive, strong
rhetorical analogy
likens two or more things to make one of them appear better or worse than another. This may lead use to change our opinions about something even though we have not being given an argument
Slanter
linguistic device designed to give a positive or negative slant regarding a claim
Intention Definition (and types)
list of characteristics you need to qualify for definition Synonymous, Etymological, Operational, Analytic
Extension Definition (and types)
list of members that make up term Enumerative, Subclass, Ostensive/demonstrative -closed/complete extension - give a full list of members in definition - open/incomplete - give a few members of definition to give enough info - Empty - know the intention of term but there are no members that fit into definition
When succesful, inductive arguments
make their conclusions more likely.
availability heuristic
making a decision based on the answer that most easily comes to mind. causes a tendency to overestimate the likelihood of some events and underestimate the likelihood of others
In the sentence "Our nifty concrete lawn duck is no longer on the lawn," the part that makes it a subjective claim is the idea that the duck was
nifty
Is the following argument valid: 1. If (p and q), then r 2. p 3. Therefore, r
no
Identify what type of claim this is: "More stamp collectors live in Portland, Oregon than in Portland, Maine.
objective claim, it is not known by us.
a claim lacks inherent credibility when it conflicts with ______
observer's background info
Ambiguous pronoun references
occur when it is not clear to what or whom a pronoun is supposed to refer.
background information
our own observation provide our most reliable source of information about the world
our most reliable source of information about the world/ most sought after is
our own observations
Critical thinking is not about
outsmarting others
What are some words that sometimes "weasel", and can be used to produce innuendo?
perhaps, possibly, maybe, may be.
disinterested party
person / no stake in our belief in claim one way or another.
interested party
person who stands to gain from our belief
interested party
person who stands to gain from our belief in a claim (must be viewed w/ more suspicion)
Inductive Arguments are
relatively strong or weak, which depends on the degree to which its premise affects the probability of the conclusion; the probability of a conclusion is not affected by what any given person thinks.
second group - rhetoric
rely on unwarranted assumptions - stereotypes and innuendo
when true premises result in a true conclusion, the argument is valid and ________
sound
Steve Martin is my idea of a successful philosophy major term defined? definition by example, analytical, or synonym?
successful philosophy major, example
negativity bias
tendency to attach more weight to negative information that to positive information
fundamental attribution error
tendency to attribute causes of behaviour to internal factors such as personality characteristics and ignore or minimise external variables
belief bias
tendency to judge the strength of an argument based on the plausibility of its conclusion rather than on how strongly it supports that conclusion
selective perception
tendency to notice certain features to the exclusion of others.
critical thinking
the evaluation of our reasoning used in coming to conclusions
straw man fallacy
this fallacy occurs when a speaker or writer attempts to dismiss a contention by distorting or misrepresenting it - example: what do i think about outlawing large ammo clips? i think the idea of disarming everyone is ridiculous and dangerous
A definition used to reduce the vagueness of an expression is called a precising definition.
true
Clarity of language is extremely important to the ability to think critically.
true
poisoning the well
trying to dismiss what someone is GOING to say by talking about the person's consistency or circumstances or character - example: you can forget what father hennessy will say this evening about abortion; he is a priest and he is required to think that abortion is a moral sin (the priest has not said anything yet, and the person is already dismissing what Father might say)
peer pressure
trying to get us to do or believe something by appealing to fear of being excluded from the group
Caleb is going on a road trip. But people on the road trip can't visit India. So Caleb will not go to India.
valid
In order to be sound the argument must be
valid
Is the following argument valid or invalid? 1. If p, then not-q 2. q, 3. Therefore, not-p
valid
Is the following argument valid or invalid? 1. unless q, r 2. not-r 3. Therefore, q
valid
superiority illusion - the above-average effect
we think we are above-average. possibly linked to neurophysiological causes - (Yamada) less connectivity in fronto-striatal circuit/fewer D2 dopamine receptors are related to a higher self image
in a inductive argument, when the premises do not adequately support the conclusion the argument is ______
weak
weak analogy
weak argument based on debatable or unimportant similarities between two or more things
a
what fallacy is this? - you: i think we should legalize medical marijuana friend: maybe you think everyone should go around stoned, but it is absurd a. straw man fallacy b. false dilemma c. poisoning the well
What is an argument's content?
what the premises actually say, which can be true or false
c
what type of fallacy is this? - it does not make much sense to say someone is rich. after all, nobody can say just how much money makes someone rich a. ad hominem b. straw man fallacy c. line-drawing fallacy
Claim
when a belief, judgement, opinion, is asserted in a declarative sentence, the result is a claim or sentence,
psuedoreasoning: apple polishing
when an appeal to vanity enters inappropriately into an argument; appeal to ego
pseudoreasoning: appeal to anger or indignation
when anger or indignation enter inappropriately into an argument
pseudoreasoning: scare tactic
when fear enters inappropriately into an argument
When is a claim vague?
when it is inappropriately imprecise for the context at hand
conclusion indicators
words like: therefore, hence, accordingly, so
can balance of consideration arguments include both inductive and deductive reasoning?
yes
A number of your friends have taken up jogging, and you wonder whether your taking it up might have genuine health benefits for you. Whom should you trust as most reliable and objective when you seek advice concerning this?
your family physician
DeMorgan's Law
~(P &Q) is equivalent to ~P v ~Q ~(P v Q) is equivalent to ~P &~Q
What is the symbolization for the statement "It is not the case that either Alice walks home or Jan walks home"
~(p v q)
