2 What is an argument from authority? We should believe P because an expert, or authority, believes P.
3 This fallacy is committed whenever we argue for some point, not because it is well grounded in fact or logic but because of the authority of the person who presented it. The standing or prestige of a recognised authority is said to guarantee the truth of the claim, and anyone who doubts it is made to feel presumptuous or egotistical. The thrust of the argument is, Who are you to challenge the judgment of this authority or the experience of that expert? Burton Porter, The Voice of Reason, p. 96
5 p. 97: In a sense, this seems reasonable because we do accept ideas on authority all the time. No one can check the evidence of everything that is claimed, so we must depend on the information provided by authorities.
6 We need to remember that authorities are often wrong. E.g. Just as the doctrine of organic evolution is universally accepted among thinking biologists, so also the geosynclinal origin of the major mountain ranges is an established principle in geology. Thomas Clark and Colin Stearn, The Geological Evolution of North America: A Regional Approach to Historical Geology, p.43 (Ronald Press, 1960)
7 Whom should we trust? Given the fact that experts tend to disagree with one another, which experts can we trust?
8 Possible criteria Recognized, official qualifications (e.g. Ph.D.) Relevant expertise, on the topic in question. Published in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal Strong consensus among relevant experts. Absence of bias, or distorting influences Good reputation or track record. Making public arguments, using public data.
9 Secret Arguments, Secret Data If we accept people as authorities it is because we have confidence that they support their insights with good thinking and good evidence. Furthermore, the evidence should be publicly verifiable, whether in the form of reproducible experiments or rational reasons that anyone can consider. (Porter)
10 Secret Arguments, Secret Data It seems right that we should be very wary of experts who keep their arguments, or data/premises secret. Although sometimes there might plausibly be a need for secrecy ( the data are proprietary, for reasons of national security, etc.) it s still hard to trust experts in these cases.
11 FINDING REGARDING PUBLIC SAFETY INFORMATION Pursuant to Section 7(d) of the National Construction Safety Team Act, I hereby find that the disclosure of the information described below, received by the National Institute of Standards and Technology ( NIST ), in connection with its investigation of the technical causes of the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11, 2001, might jeopardize public safety. Therefore, NIST shall not release the following information: [all input data from their computer model of WTC 7] Patrick Gallagher, Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, July 9, 2009.
12 Pay attention to qualifications? Believe the most qualified authority? Maybe, as a general policy. How do you judge which qualifications are better? Ph.D. beats M.A.? Number of publications? Professors beat those working in industry?
13 Can we trust a consensus? On some controversial questions, the public is urged to accept the view of a strong consensus of scientists in the relevant field(s). E.g. on biological evolution, global warming, vaccine safety, safety of fracking, effectiveness of seatbelts, HIV is the cause of AIDS, etc.
14 Yet we should remember that a consensus among experts can emerge for various reasons. Anyone who has studied the history of science knows that scientists are not immune to the nonrational dynamics of the herd. Jay Richards, in The American (the journal of the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank) March 16, E.g. the information cascade mechanism.
15 THE CALF-PATH One day, through the primeval wood, A calf walked home, as good calves should; But made a trail all bent askew, A crooked trail, as all calves do. Since then three hundred years have fled, And, I infer, the calf is dead. But still he left behind his trail, And thereby hangs my moral tale. Sam Walter Foss ( )
17 Because of [the information cascade], groups are surprisingly prone to reach mistaken conclusions even when most of the people started out knowing better, according to the economists Sushil Bikhchandani, David Hirshleifer and Ivo Welch. Cascades are especially common in medicine as doctors take their cues from others, leading them to overdiagnose some faddish ailments (called bandwagon diseases) and overprescribe certain treatments (like the tonsillectomies once popular for children). Unable to keep up with the volume of research, doctors look for guidance from an expert or at least someone who sounds confident. John Tierney, New York Times, October 9, 2007.
18 Given that there are such cases, where a strong consensus turned out to be flat wrong: We want to know whether a scientific consensus is based on solid evidence and sound reasoning, or social pressure and groupthink. the power of the paradigm often shapes the thinking of scientists so strongly that they become unable to accurately summarize, let alone evaluate, radical alternatives. Question the paradigm, and some respond with dogmatic fanaticism (Jay Richards, op. cit.)
19 Most mavericks are cranks We shouldn t, of course, forget the other side of the coin. There are always cranks and conspiracy theorists. No matter how well founded a scientific consensus, there s someone somewhere easily accessible online that thinks it s all hokum. Sometimes these folks turn out to be right. But often, they re just cranks whose counsel is best disregarded. (Jay Richards, op. cit.)
20 Reasons to be suspicious of consensus The topic is tied up with politics, money, religion, morality There is no direct empirical test of the consensus view Within the present paradigm, TINA (There Is No Alternative) The consensus view is opposed by a substantial minority of credentialed scientists, with no apparent axe to grind. Critics of the orthodoxy are often attacked personally, called nasty names, have their views misrepresented, lose funding, etc. (So scientists are pressured to toe the party line.) The consensus scientists say that all the evidence supports their view, and that dissenters have no valid criticisms. Different claims get bundled together. The expert community is heavily invested in the consensus theory, so that giving it up would be very costly or embarrassing.
21 In the text below, identify briefly any indications that the former consensus against Wegener s theory of continental drift ( mobilism ) was possibly not well founded. When Wegener s mobilist ideas were first published in English, in 1922, many English geologists attacked them as German pseudo-science. Wegener s views were also strongly contrary to the established fixist tradition, leading one geologist to say, If we are to believe Wegener s hypothesis we must forget everything that has been learned in the past 70 years and start all over again. It didn t help that the Drift hypothesis itself was often linked in people s minds to Wegener s proposed (and refuted) mechanism for moving the continents. At the time it was not possible to measure continental movements directly, so arguments were indirect, depending on background assumptions. Nevertheless a small but stubborn group of professional geologists did take Wegener s view seriously and various mobilist theories were developed.
22 Authority and Peer Review One of the main symbols of authority in academic communities, including science, is the peer-reviewed journal article. Work that hasn t been published in a proper peerreviewed journal isn t worth taking seriously. But peer-reviewed work has an aura of invincibility.
23 My work on the ecology of slime moulds has been published in the journal Nature. Read as: My work on the ecology of slime moulds has been published in the journal NaturE
24 Criticisms of Peer review "There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too selfserving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print. Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of Journal of the American Medical Association (quoted from Wikipedia)
25 Richard Horton, editor of the British medical journal The Lancet: We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.
26 Peer review is easily fixed This reminds me of a paper that was being reviewed by the boss of the lab I was in. He passed it around to see what people thought. I told him that I thought it was pretty poor. He said, Yeah I know. They cite us really well so I am going to accept it anyway. (a scientist writing on a private list)
27 Hundreds of dissenters If a few hundred experts in a certain field disagree with the consensus view, what should we think? Should we take it seriously?
28 Dissent from Darwin petition (2001) "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged." More than 700 scientists signed this (must either hold a Ph.D. in a scientific field such as biology, chemistry, mathematics, engineering, computer science, or one of the other natural sciences, or be a professor of medicine).
29 Project Steve petition Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence (More than 1100 scientists signed this. Need a Ph.D. in biology, geology, paleontology, or a related scientific field, and be called Steven, Stephanie, Esteban, Stefano, etc.)
30 Beware bundling of claims: The Dissent from Darwin petition questioned whether mutation and selection is able to produce novel complex structures. The Project Steve petition affirms evolution and common ancestry, and selection as a major mechanism for it. (Personally, I could sign both of them, since major is vague enough. I would not say creative and crucial.)
31 the book s contention that natural selection s importance for evolution has been hugely overstated represents a point of view that has a growing set of adherents. (A few months ago, I was amazed to hear it expressed, in the strongest terms, from another highly eminent microbiologist.) My impression is that evolutionary biology is increasingly separating into two camps, divided over just this question. On the one hand are the population geneticists and evolutionary biologists who continue to believe that selection has a creative and crucial role in evolution and, on the other, there is a growing body of scientists (largely those who have come into evolution from molecular biology, developmental biology or developmental genetics, and microbiology) who reject it. Adam S. Wilkins, review of James Shapiro s Evolution: A View from the 21 st Century, in Genome Biology and Evolution, January 2012.
32 2900 Architects and Engineers We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7. (There must be at least a million licensed engineers in the US alone. Do we pay attention to 3000?)
33 Universally though has the foregoing explanation of collapse [due to aircraft impacts and fire] been accepted by the communities of structural engineers and structural mechanics researchers, some outside critics have nevertheless exploited various unexplained observations to disseminate allegations of controlled demolition. (Zdenek Bazant et al, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, October 2008.)
34 Bias Regardless of academic credentials, it seems that authority can be destroyed by bias. Bias isn t the same as having an opinion. It all depends on why one has an opinion. A bias is defined as a non-epistemic source of belief. In other words, one s belief is caused by something other than the proper reasons for belief, such as evidence and argument.
35 Bias conflict of interest Let s say a public official is supposed to decide which of 3 bids for a construction project to accept. She s supposed to choose the one that will best serve the public interest. But what if her brother works for one of the bidding companies, and badly needs the work? (Also, that company s bid isn t the strongest.) What will she do?
36 Bias conflict of interest A bias is a kind of conflict of interest, where one s proper interest (to believe the truth) conflicts with some non-epistemic interest, such as keeping one s job, making money, etc. It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it! (Upton Sinclair)
37 Examples of Biased Beliefs A mother cannot believe that her son, her baby boy, has committed the crime he is accused of. A professor is sure that his pet theory, the one his entire career is based on, is true. A scientist sponsored by BP assures us that most of the oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico has been eaten by bacteria already.
38 Confirmation Bias The moment one has offered an original explanation for a phenomenon which seems satisfactory, that moment affection for his intellectual child springs into existence; and as the explanation grows into a definite theory, his parental affections cluster about his intellectual offspring There is [then] an unconscious selection and magnifying of phenomena that fall into harmony with the theory and support it, and an unconscious neglect of those that fail of coincidence. The mind lingers with pleasure upon the facts that fall happily into the embrace of the theory, and feels a natural coldness toward those that seem refractory. Chamberlin, T. C. (1890). The method of multiple working hypotheses, Science, 15, p. 93
39 Confirmation bias
40 Bias in medicine The United States Preventive Services Task Force, appointed by the Dept. of Health and Human Services, has released (Oct. 2011) an update for the invasive and fear-provoking male screening test, the P.S.A. blood test and manual exam for prostate cancer.
41 Bias in medicine (T)he test does not save lives over all and often leads to more tests and treatments that needlessly cause pain, impotence and incontinence in many, However Treating men with high P.S.A. levels has become a lucrative business.
42 From 1986 through 2005, one million men received surgery, radiation therapy or both who would not have been treated without a P.S.A. test... Among them, at least 5,000 died soon after surgery and 10,000 to 70,000 suffered serious complications. Half had persistent blood in their semen, and 200,000 to 300,000 suffered impotence, incontinence or both.
43 Doctors also acknowledged that financial incentives from the fee-for-service payment model encouraged them to do more rather than less. Thirty-nine percent said other primary-care doctors would order fewer diagnostic tests if those tests didn t generate extra revenue for them, and 62% said medical subspecialists would cut back if the tests didn t come with financial incentives.
44 Other cases of bias Pharmaceutical companies have hired ghost writers to place product-friendly articles in prestigious medical journals, under the name of a recognised scientist. Oil companies have supported the research of scientists who cast doubt on the view that global warming is caused by use of fossil fuels.
45 Ad hominem An ad hominem argument, one that attacks a person, is usually improper. But it can be ok when used against an argument from authority. When is it ok? (An ad hominem attack on authority isn t always reasonable, it only sometimes is.)
50 7. Read the following passage, and then list three factors that possibly weaken the authority of Grant Fredericks in this testimony. (N.B. Do not criticize Fredericks argument.)
51 VANCOUVER An inquiry probing the death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver's airport in 2007 watched a three-second video clip just before he was Tasered. An expert forensic video analyst, Grant Fredericks, testified the video showed Dziekanski took three steps toward four RCMP officers before he was hit with the first of five Taser shots. He appeared to be moving away from the camera, Fredericks told inquiry commissioner Thomas Braidwood, a retired judge.
52 Fredericks is a former TV reporter who became a Vancouver police officer in 1988, left policing in 2000 to become a video analysis consultant and teacher. He said he used an amateur video taken of the incident at the airport and measured the computer pixels between Dziekanski and fixed objects such as an overhead sign and an airport counter during the critical three seconds. The video shows Dziekanski methodically moving toward police before he was shot with the Taser, he said. Cross-examined by Don Rosenbloom, the lawyer representing the Polish government at the inquiry, Fredericks couldn t give an exact estimate of the distance Dziekanski moved toward the four Mounties whether it was one inch or one foot.
53 The witness also admitted he was no expert in biomechanics or the study of human motion. Two other experts Duane MacInnis, a Vancouver professional engineer, and Mark Hird-Rutter, a certified photogammetrist who teaches at BCIT produced reports that found Fredericks used flawed methodology. Hird-Rutter concluded that, using Fredericks measurements, it is not possible to determine if Mr. Dziekanski moved forwards or backwards.
54 From Richard Dawkins article in Practice Quiz #1: If correct, Behe s calculations would at a stroke confound generations of mathematical geneticists, who have repeatedly shown that evolutionary rates are not limited by mutation. Single-handedly, Behe is taking on Ronald Fisher, Sewall Wright, J. B. S. Haldane, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Richard Lewontin, John Maynard Smith and hundreds of their talented co-workers and intellectual descendants.
55 Evolutionary biologist Arlin Stolzfus, referring to this criticism of Behe s book, thinks that Dawkins is: stuck in a time warp defending the original Modern Synthesis (a theory of evolution developed in the 1940s) In making this claim, Dawkins is correctly representing the Modern Synthesis view that (due to the buffering effect of the gene pool ) evolution does not depend on the rate of new mutations, a principle that he believes to be an infallible theoretical result.
Argument from Authority Sez who? What is an argument from authority? We should believe P because an expert or We should believe P because an expert, or authority, believes P. In our textbook, p. 96: This
Your Paper The assignment is really about logic and the evaluation of information, not purely about writing You are to write a paper on the general topic of global warming. The first challenge is to keep
and Science Understanding the conflict (WAR)? Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, is a documentary which looks at how scientists who have discussed or written about Intelligent Design (and along the way
Fallacies in academic writing Chad Nilep There are many possible sources of fallacy an idea that is mistakenly thought to be true, even though it may be untrue in academic writing. The phrase logical fallacy
Since humans began studying the world around them, they have wondered how the biodiversity we see around us came to be. There have been many ideas posed throughout history, but not enough observable facts
MÈTODE Science Studies Journal, 5 (2015): 195-199. University of Valencia. DOI: 10.7203/metode.84.3883 ISSN: 2174-3487. Article received: 10/07/2014, accepted: 18/09/2014. IS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD A MYTH?
Appeal to Authority (Ad Verecundiam) An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form: 1) Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S. 2) Person A makes claim C about subject S. 3)
The scientific worldview is supremely influential because science has been so successful. It touches all our lives through technology and through modern medicine. Our intellectual world has been transformed
Mètode Science Studies Journal ISSN: 2174-3487 firstname.lastname@example.org Universitat de València España Sober, Elliott IS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD A MYTH? PERSPECTIVES FROM THE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Mètode
Annual Reviews Audio Presents An Interview with Susan Gottesman Annual Reviews Audio. 2009 First published online on August 28, 2009 Annual Reviews Audio interviews are online at www.annualreviews.org/page/audio
Bias, Humans Perception, and the Internet What are your favorite conspiracy theories? Moon landing hoax Vaccines cause autism Climate change is a hoax Chemtrails are a thing Politicians are all Reptilian
BIO 221 Invertebrate Zoology I Spring 2010 Stephen M. Shuster Northern Arizona University http://www4.nau.edu/isopod Lecture 1 Course Information Stephen M. Shuster Professor of Invertebrate Zoology Office:
Human Nature & Human Diversity: Sex, Love & Parenting; Morality, Religion & Race Course Description Human Nature & Human Diversity is listed as both a Philosophy course (PHIL 253) and a Cognitive Science
BERT VOGELSTEIN, M.D. '74 22 December 1999 Mame Warren, interviewer Warren: This is Mame Warren. Today is December 22, 1999. I'm in Baltimore, Maryland, with Bert Vogelstein. I've got to start with a silly
SCIENTIFIC THEORIES ABOUT THE ORIGINS OF THE WORLD AND HUMANITY Key ideas: Cosmology is about the origins of the universe which most scientists believe is caused by the Big Bang. Evolution concerns the
Religious and Scientific Affliations As found on the IDEA Center website at http://www.ideacenter.org Introduction When discussing the subject of "origins" (i.e. the question "How did we get here?", people
Tuning Up Your Baloney Detector Critical thinking skills are necessary for thinking biblically and in a way that glorifies God. Sue Bohlin explores some of the ways to develop those skills. This article
1 Van Fraassen s Appreciated Anti-Realism Lane DesAutels I. Introduction In his seminal work, The Scientific Image (1980), Bas van Fraassen formulates a distinct view of what science is - one that has,
AICE Thinking kills Review How to Master Paper 2 Important Things to Remember You are given 1 hour and 45 minutes for Paper 2 You should spend approximately 30 minutes on each question Write neatly! Read
Quantum Home Trainer is Fraud How Does the Quantum Home Trainer Work? Answer: It does NOT Work, it is Fraudulent, Unregistered, Unverified, and Unsubstantiated WHPRS rating -2 because it is actually based
. What is the purpose of argumentation? Argumentation 2. What should we consider when making (or testing) an argument? According to Toulmin (964), the checking list can be outlined as follows: () The Claim
Introduction to Evolution DANILO V. ROGAYAN JR. Faculty, Department of Natural Sciences Only a theory? Basic premises for this discussion Evolution is not a belief system. It is a scientific concept. It
PHILOSOPHIA CHRISTI VOL. 7, NO. 2 COPYRIGHT 2005 Paley s Inductive Inference to Design A Response to Graham Oppy JONAH N. SCHUPBACH Department of Philosophy Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan
Chance, Chaos and the Principle of Sufficient Reason Alexander R. Pruss Department of Philosophy Baylor University October 8, 2015 Contents The Principle of Sufficient Reason Against the PSR Chance Fundamental
Christian Discernment We are confronted with ethical choices and moral complexity. We must apply biblical principles to these social and political issues. And we must avoid the pitfalls and logical fallacies
SHARPENING THINKING SKILLS Case study: Science and religion (* especially relevant to Chapters 3, 8 & 10) Case study 1: Teaching truth claims When approaching truth claims about the world it is important
1 What is rationality? (Paper presented by Tim Harding at Mordi Skeptics meetup, 1 February 2011) What do we skeptics mean when we say that a belief is irrational? How do we define rationality and irrationality?
New people and a new type of communication Lyudmila A. Markova, Russian Academy of Sciences Steve Fuller considers the important topic of the origin of a new type of people. He calls them intellectuals,
About the author: A Stroke of Genius: Striving for Greatness in All You Do by R. W. Hamming Dr. Richard Hamming is best known for the Hamming code, Hamming distance and the Hamming spectral window along
Physics 496 Introduction to Research Lecture 2.0: Tools for the Scientific Skeptic (Based on a talk by Lance Cooper) Critical Evaluation Scientific papers and research presentations, when well done, are
LOGICAL FALLACIES/ERRORS OF ARGUMENT Deduction Fallacies Term Definition Example(s) 1 Equivocation Ambiguity 2 types: The word or phrase may be ambiguous, in which case it has more than one distinct meaning
The Clock without a Maker There are a many great questions in life in which people have asked themselves. Who are we? What is the meaning of life? Where do come from? This paper will be undertaking the
A Brief History of Thinking about Thinking Thomas Lombardo "Education is nothing more nor less than learning to think." Peter Facione In this article I review the historical evolution of principles and
FIVE MINUTES WITH A DARWINIST: EXPOSING THE FLUFF IN EVOLUTION Approaching the Evolutionist Without religious books Without revelation Without faith F.L.U.F.F. Evolution is more air than substance. Focus
THE HYPOTHETICAL-DEDUCTIVE METHOD OR THE INFERENCE TO THE BEST EXPLANATION: THE CASE OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION BY NATURAL SELECTION JUAN ERNESTO CALDERON ABSTRACT. Critical rationalism sustains that the
How To Recognize and Avoid Them Joseph M Conlon Technical Advisor, AMCA Fallacies are logical errors that weaken arguments Commonplace Can be persuasive to the uninformed Can be driven by agendas or strong
criticalthinking.org http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-critical-mind-is-a-questioning-mind/481 The Critical Mind is A Questioning Mind Learning How to Ask Powerful, Probing Questions Introduction
Revelation: God revealing himself to religious believers. Nature of God - What God s character is like. Atheist a person who believes that there is no god. Agnostic A person who believes that we cannot
Whose God? What Science?: Reply to Michael Behe Robert T. Pennock Vol. 21, No 3-4, May-Aug 2001, pp. 16-19 In his review of my book Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism that he recently
Why Ethics? Part 1 of a Video Tutorial on Business Ethics Available on YouTube and itunes University Recorded 2012 by John Hooker Professor, Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University Lightly
An Introduction to Science Scientific Thinking and the Scientific Method by Steven D. Schafersman Department of Geology Miami University January, 1997 http://www.muohio.edu/~schafesd/documents/intro-to-sci.htmlx
Argument Writing Whooohoo!! Argument instruction is necessary * Argument comprehension is required in school assignments, standardized testing, job promotion as well as political and personal decision-making
Article Walter R. Thorson A Response to Douglas Groothuis Walter R. Thorson I think his [Groothuis ] proposal to teach intelligent design (ID) in the secular university is a bad idea [M]ost arguments for
How persuasive is this argument? 1 (not at all). 7 (very) NIU should require all students to pass a comprehensive exam in order to graduate because such exams have been shown to be effective for improving
Handout 1: Arguments -- the basics It is useful to think of an argument as a list of sentences. The last sentence is the conclusion, and the other sentences are the premises. Thus: (1) No professors
AN OUTLINE OF CRITICAL THINKING LEVELS OF INQUIRY 1. Information: correct understanding of basic information. 2. Understanding basic ideas: correct understanding of the basic meaning of key ideas. 3. Probing:
An NSTA Q&A on the Teaching of Evolution Editor s Note NSTA thanks Dr. Gerald Skoog for his help in developing the following question-and-answer (Q&A) document. Skoog is a retired Paul Whitfield Horn Professor
1 Introduction What s a Crazy Idea? HAVE YOU EVER wondered why so many of the ideas in modern science sound so crazy, and how to evaluate which of the current crop of crazy ideas might be true? This book
Ten questions about teaching evolution in the classroom Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution Teaching evolution in the classroom can pose pitfalls for a teacher. What follows
The Myth of Scientific Public Policy. By Robert Formaini. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1990. Robert Formaini's illuminating work throws into question a key doctrine of social planners not satisfied
Revised final draft On the futility of criticizing the neoclassical maximization hypothesis The last couple of decades have seen an intensification of methodological criticism of the foundations of neoclassical
Universe and Child: Presiding Over the Meeting Ann Berry Somers, Department of Biology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro Greensboro, N.C. 27402-6170 It takes a universe to make a child both in
Kowalski, L. History of attempts to publish a paper. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. History of attempts to publish a paper Ludwik Kowalski
Do we have knowledge of the external world? This book discusses the skeptical arguments presented in Descartes' Meditations 1 and 2, as well as how Descartes attempts to refute skepticism by building our
1 ANTICIPATING OBJECTIONS IN ARGUMENTATION It has rightly been emphasized in the literature on argumentation that a well developed capacity to recognize and counter argumentative objections is an important
Defending The Faith: A Game Plan For Defending Your Faith May 29, 2011 Hunters Creek Community Church Pastor James M. Lorch INTRODUCTION We do need some basic knowledge in order to defend our faith. That
All About Arguments PHI 1700: Global Ethics I. What is an Argument? In philosophy, an argument is not a dispute or debate; rather, it is a structured defense of a claim (that is, a statement or assertion)
Five Sample Logical Reasoning Questions and Explanations Directions: The questions in this section are based on the reasoning contained in brief statements or passages. For some questions, more than one
FOCUS ON THE FAMILY'S t elpyoect Th~ Outline Lesson 5 -Science: What is True? I. Introduction A. Psalm 19:1-4- "The heavens declare the Glory of God" -General Revelation B. Romans 1:18-20 - "God has made
ARGUMENT AS INQUIRY: QUESTIONING A TEXT Adapted from Reading Rhetorically (A Reader for Writers), 2nd edition by Virginia A. Chappell and Alice M. Gillam and Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings,
The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism Issues: I. Problem of Induction II. Popper s rejection of induction III. Salmon s critique of deductivism 2 I. The problem of induction 1. Inductive vs.
Dr Jonathan Sarfati is the bestselling author of Refuting Evolution (more than 500,000 copies in print), Refuting Compromise and T he Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution. This last book
Hillcrest Christian School dba HERITAGE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL 17531 Rinaldi Street Granada Hills, CA 91344 818-368-7071 COACHING EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION Your interest in Heritage Christian School is appreciated.
MAHARISHI VEDIC APPROACH TO HEALTH By Dr. Sandeep Chaudhary & Dr. Kulreet Chaudhary What is Maharishi Ayurveda? Maharishi Ayurveda is the revival of the traditional Vedic health care system of India, which
Intro to Philosophy Phil 110 Lecture 6: 1-25 Daniel Kelly I. Mechanics A. Upcoming Readings 1. Today we ll discuss a. Dennett, Show Me the Science b. Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (10) c.
Common Topics for Literary and Cultural Analysis: What kinds of topics are good ones? The best topics are ones that originate out of your own reading of a work of literature. Here are some common approaches
Common Logical Fallacies Effective arguments rely on logic and facts for support, yet speakers and authors, whether intentionally or unintentionally, can mislead an audience with a flaw in reasoning. Readers
1. Introduction 1.1. Formal deductive logic 1.1.0. Overview In this course we will study reasoning, but we will study only certain aspects of reasoning and study them only from one perspective. The special
Join the national conversation! SHOULD INTELLIGENT DESIGN BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOL? Focus Words design creationism concept evolve perspective Weekly Passage Bethany Collchay s parents want Bethany to believe
INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE Péter Érdi Henry R. Luce Professor Center for Complex Systems Studies Kalamazoo College, Michigan and Dept. Biophysics KFKI Research Institute for Particle and Nuclear Physics of
The Four Core Process & Staffing For the Small Church Excerpt from Effective Staffing for Vital Churches By Bill Easum & Bill Tenny-Brittian Introducing Four Core Processes for the Small Church (From Effective
JOB DESCRIPTION DATE: August 2016 JOB TITLE: Missions Coach, Rocky Mountain Team Full-time ministerial position that is salaried with full benefits Work location: Work from home. TEAM has strategically
Biophysics of Consciousness: A Foundational Approach R. R. Poznanski, J. A. Tuszynski and T. E. Feinberg Copyright 2017 World Scientific, Singapore. FOREWORD: ADDRESSING THE HARD PROBLEM OF CONSCIOUSNESS
OUR FORENSICS TEAM IS GETTING NEW UNICORNS By Bradley Walton Copyright MMXV by Bradley Walton, All Rights Reserved. Heuer Publishing LLC in association with Brooklyn Publishers, LLC ISBN: 978-1-60003-815-0
Darwinism as Religion: What Literature Tells us about evolution By Michael Ruse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016 jennifer komorowski In his book Darwinism as Religion: What Literature Tells Us About
What About Evolution? Many say human beings are the culmination of millions or even billions of years of evolution starting with a one-celled organism which gradually developed into higher forms of life.
Western Kentucky University From the SelectedWorks of Charles H. Smith Spring 2008 'Hussel,' 'Bussel' and 'Kussel,' Or, Using Google Books to Stalk the Elusive Alfred Russel Wallace Charles H. Smith, Western
Argument and Persuasion Stating Opinions and Proposals The Method It all starts with an opinion - something that people can agree or disagree with. The Method Move to action Speak your mind Convince someone
Chapter 1 Meaning and Truth Pragmatism William James described pragmatism as a method of approaching meaning and truth that would overcome the split between scientific and religious thinking. Scientific
Demarcation of Science from other academic disciplines -Demarcation of natural sciences from other academic disciplines -Demarcation of science from technology, pure and applied science -Demarcation of