R101 (phil 101) Midterm Review Sheet

-What do English usage and the democratic spirit have in common?

(142) Caring about the english usage is like the democratic spirit because both must combine rigor and humility.

-Define argument.

A claim defended with reasons, includes premise and conclusion

-Symbolize Disjunctive Syllogism.

A or B not A Therefore, B

Fallacy of bandwagon argument

An arguer appeals to a person's desire to be popular, accepted, or valued, rather than to logically relevant reasons or evidence. example: All the popular, cool kids at Westmont Middle School wear Mohawk haircuts. Therefore, you should, too.

Fallacy of appeal to pity

An arguer attempts to evoke feelings of pity or compassion, where such feelings, however understandable, are not relevant to the truth of the arguer's conclusion. example: Officer, I know I was going 80 miles per hour in a 15-mile-an-hour school zone, but I don't deserve a speeding ticket. I've had a really tough week. Yesterday I got fired from my job, and last Monday my Chihuahua got eaten by a Great Dane.

Fallacy of two wrongs make a right

An arguer attempts to justify a wrongful act by claiming that some other act is just as bad or worse. example: I admit we plied Olympic officials with booze, prostitutes, free ski vacations, and millions of dollars in outright bribes to be selected as the site of the next Winter Olympics. But everybody does it. That's the way the process works. Therefore, paying those bribes wasn't really wrong.

Fallacy of attacking the motive

An arguer criticizes a person's motivation for offering a particular argument or claim, rather than examining the worth of the argument or claim itself. example: Jim Gibson has argued that we need to build a new middle school. But Gibson is the owner of Gibson's Construction Company. He'll make a fortune if his company is picked to build the new school. Obviously, Gibson's argument is a lot of self-serving baloney.

Fallacy of straw man

An arguer misrepresents another person's position to make it easier to attack. example: - Professor Davis has argued that the Bible should not be read literally. Obviously, Davis believes that any reading of the Bible is as good as any other. But this would mean that there is no difference between a true interpretation of Scripture and a false interpretation. Such a view is absurd.

Fallacy of Personal Attack (Ad Hominem)

An arguer rejects a person's argument or claim by attacking the person's character rather than the person's argument or claim. example: Spongebob argues that the ocean is too salty for optimal living conditions. However, Spongebob is a brainless, fictional sponge. Therefore, we should not insider his point of view.

Fallacy of look who's talking (tu quoque)

An arguer rejects another person's argument or claim because that person is a hypocrite. example: My opponent, Bill Peters, has accused me of running a negative political campaign. But Peters has run a much more negative campaign than I have. Just last week he ran television ads falsely accusing me of embezzlement and cruelty to animals. Clearly, Peters's charge that I'm guilty of mudslinging is untrue.

Fallacy of Begging the Question

An arguer states or assumes as a premise the very thing he is seeking to prove as a conclusion. example of CIRCULAR REASONING: I am entitled to say whatever I choose because I have a right to say whatever I please. (A because B, B because A) example of repeating the conclusion: Bungee-jumping is dangerous because it is unsafe

Fallacy of Scare Tactics

An arguer threatens harm to a reader or listener and this threat is irrelevant to the truth of the arguer's conclusion. example: You've argued that Coach Bubba should be fired because he's twice been ar- rested for starting barroom brawls. But Coach Bubba is the winningest football coach we've ever had at Culmbank High. He doesn't deserve to be fired. And, if you can't understand that, maybe these boys with baseball bats can change your mind.

Fallacy of red herring

An arguer tries to sidetrack her audience by raising an irrelevant issue, and then claims that the original issue has been effectively settled by the irrelevant diversion. example: Frank has argued that Volvos are safer cars than Ford Mustang convertibles. But Volvos are clunky, boxlike cars, whereas Mustang convertibles are sleek, powerful, and sexy. Clearly, Frank doesn't know what he's talking about.

Fallacy of Equivocation

An arguer uses a key word in an argument in two (or more) different senses. example: Hanes is advertising "tanks for all occasions." It's illegal for anyone but the military to sell tanks. So, Hanes is breaking the law.

-Which of the suggestions from "The Thinking Person's Checklist" resonates with you most and why?

Be brave

-Why does Jacobs argue that thinking well is not merely "overcoming bias"?

Because it is more so about taking the time to think and a shift in the orientation of the will than overcoming bias (page 17)

Give an example of a present-day "child in the basement" of our society (Omelas short story).

Children working in factories that are actually being human trafficked

- What is Bulverism?

Explain that your opponent is wrong, and then explain his error (variation of the fallacy of personal attack)

-True or false: When Wilt Chamberlain refused to shoot free throws underhanded, he was being irrational.

False

True or false: thinking well is a solitary exercise.

False

-What have you learned from How to Think? What will you do in response?

Fill in own personal response

-Symbolize Pure Hypothetical Syllogism. (63)

If A then B If B then C Therefore, If A then C

-Symbolize Modus Ponens.

If A, then B A. Therefore, B. (59)

-Symbolize Modus Tollens.

If A, then B. Not B. Therefore, not A. (63)

-Give me your own example of a MP argument.

If I ate a spider, then I will have a stomach ache. I ate a spider. Therefore, I have a stomach ache.

-In an inductive argument, how do the premises relate to the conclusion?

If the premises are true, the conclusion is plausible and likely

-In a deductive argument, how do the premises relate to the conclusion?

If the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true

-Give me your own example of a MT argument.

If there is smoke, then there is a fire. There is not a fire. Therefore, there is no smoke.

-What are the key differences between belonging to an Inner Ring, and genuine group Membership?

Inner ring - you must give into the ring's agenda and not question their beliefs/abandon some of your values. You can be replaced easily by someone who is willing to abide by their standards. Group membership - safe place that is open to people's ideas, questions, and thoughts. People are wanted for their uniqueness and valued. Differences are accepted.

-What is the value of critical thinking, as part of a holistic, liberal arts undergraduate education? (CT p. 10 & p. 26; also p. 24)

It brings about personal liberation, allowing us to lead "examined" lives,it can be a transformative and rewarding experience

-What's wrong with relativism?

It is the view that truth is a matter of opinion. But that cannot be true because it denies absolute truth. It leads to ethical issues. It holds no one accountable. It tell sus that we should accept the customs and values of our society, even if it is an intolerant society (20,24)

-Is it possible to eliminate System 1 thinking and replace it with System 2 thinking?

No

-How might solidarity with the oppressed and marginalized play out in a group marked by genuine membership? (67)

Openness to ideas about how to help different groups in different contexts; understands that not one thing will fix everyone's suffering nor will one solution be best for everyone across the board. People of genuine membership aim to help others in their suffering.

-What is required in order to think well?

Practice patience and mastering fear (23) Integrate communal aspect - We are never thinking alone, listening to and valuing other's thoughts is essential. Willingness to change views when they should be.

-"Give it five minutes." What does Jacobs call the state of mind in which one begins to immediately formulate one's argument against a position, e.g. in talking with a friend or listening to a speech, rather than listening?

Refutation mode

- R.C.O. - What does this acronym stand for, and what does it mean?

Repugnant cultural other

-List three indicating (?) words for the premises.

Since, because, given that

Which facets of our daily lives strongly reinforce our tendency not to "give it five minutes" before responding to someone or something?

Social Media use, Email sending, online communication

-What are the liberal arts? How do they relate to the art of thinking?

The liberal arts is a field of study based on rational thinking that comprises of humanities, social and physical sciences, etc. It relates to the art of thinking because it teaches us how to examine the world and our thoughts, which is essential to the art of thinking.

-What's the difference between the science of thinking vs. the art of thinking?

The science of thinking looks at how we think, the art of thinking looks at how we should improve at thinking (16)

-List three indicating (?) words for the conclusion.

Therefore, so, for this reason

-Define syllogism.

Three-line argument that consists of exactly two premises and a conclusion

-True or false: thinking well includes emotion (J.S. Mill example).

True

-What's wrong with "unscrupulous optimism?"

Unscrupulous optimism does not take into the account that there will always be people who are marginalized, it is always "I" based, maintains hegemonic power (65) lends to becoming an inner ring; anyone who questions the system or ideology of the party is dismissed from the inner ring if not punished or killed.

-What does it mean when Jacobs claims that we have a "hypertrophic instinct for consensus"? How does consensus inhibit our ability to think?

We are invested in not thinking (22), and analysis deprives us from the pleasure of sharing an attitude which one knows is socially approved. This inhibits our ability to think because we tend to then substitute emotions for thoughts.

-Can System 1 thinking be changed or improved?

Yes

Did Megan Phelps-Roper eventually leave Westboro Baptist Church? Y/N

Yes

-The logical fallacy most commonly confused with MP is called ______ the ______. (64)

affirming the consequent: if A then B B therefore A

-In a conditional statement, the "if" part of the statement, which precedes the comma, is called what? The "then" part of the statement that comes after the comma is called what?

antecedent, consequent (63)

-The logical fallacy most commonly confused with MT is called ______ the ______. (64)

denying the antecedent: if A then B not A therefore not B

-System 1 thinking is ______ thinking. System 2 thinking is ______ thinking. This maps onto Jonathan Haidt's distinction between the ______ (» System 1) and the ______ (» System 2).

fast,slow,elephant,rider

-Give me your own example of a HS argument.

if you can breathe, you are alive if you are alive, you can blink if you can breathe, you can blink

-In an inductive argument we are also seeking two things, referring to the form of the argument and to its content. What are they? Explain.

inductive strength cogency

-MP translates, from Latin to English, as:

mode of affirmation (59)

-MT translates, from Latin to English, as:

mode of negation (63)

-Jacobs argues that thinking should not be characterized merely as "overcoming bias," but rather as overcoming the ______ to ______ ______.

urge to avoid thinking

-In a deductive argument we are aiming at two things, referring to the form of the argument and to its content. What are they? Explain.

validity and soundness

-Give me your own example of a DS argument.

you are short or tall you are not short therefore, you are not tall