# Ad hominem Argument Affirmative claim Affirming the antecedent Affirming the consequent Argument by force Argument from analogy Ambiguity

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Ad hominem Argument Affirmative claim Affirming the antecedent Affirming the consequent Argument by force Argument from analogy Ambiguity"

## Transcription

2 502 GLOSSARY Better-than-average illusion When a majority of a group estimates they are better at something than a majority of the group, the group is said to be subject to this illusion. When the majority of a group estimates they are worse at something than a majority of group, they are said to be subject to the worse than average illusion. Biased generalization, fallacy of Overestimating the strength of an argument based on a biased sample. Biased sample A sample is said to be biased with respect to a feature if a disproportionate number of things in the sample have or lack the variable. Burden of proof, misplaced A form of fallacious reasoning in which the burden of proving a point is placed on the wrong side. One version occurs when a lack of evidence on one side is taken as evidence for the other side, in cases where the burden of proving the point rests on the latter side. Categorical claim Any standard-form categorical claim or any claim that means the same as some standard-form categorical claim. See standard-form categorical claim. Categorical imperative Kant s term for an absolute moral rule that holds unconditionally or categorically. Categorical logic A system of logic based on the relations of inclusion and exclusion among classes ( categories ). This branch of logic specifies the logical relationships among claims that can be expressed in the forms All Xs are Ys, No Xs are Ys, Some Xs are Ys, and Some Xs are not Ys. Developed by Aristotle in the fourth century b.c.e., categorical logic is also known as Aristotelian or traditional logic. Categorical syllogism A two-premise deductive argument in which every claim is categorical and each of three terms appears in two of the claims for example, all soldiers are martinets and no martinets are diplomats, so no soldiers are diplomats. Causal claim A statement that says or implies that one thing caused or causes another. Causal factor A causal factor for an effect is a variable whose presence in a population raises the probability that the effect will be present as well. Causal hypothesis A provisional explanation of the cause or effect of something. Causal mechanism An interface between cause and effect that has the property of making the effect happen, given the cause. Cause-and-effect claim See causal claim. Chain argument An argument consisting of three Conditional claims, in which the antecedents of one premise and the conclusion are the same, the consequents of the other premise and the conclusion are the same, and the consequent of the first premise and the antecedent of the second premise are the same. Circularity The property of a causal claim where the cause merely restates the effect. Circumstantial ad hominem The illogical notion that an individual s personal circumstances somehow refute his or her views. Claim When a belief (judgment, opinion) is asserted in a declarative sentence, the result is a claim or statement. Claim variable A letter that stands for a claim. Cognitive bias A psychological factor that unconsciously affects belief formation. Common practice, argument from Attempts to justify or defend an action or a practice on the grounds that it is common that everybody, or at least lots of people, do the same thing. Common thread When an effect is present on multiple occasions, look for some other shared feature (common thread) as a possible cause. Complementary term A term is complementary to another term if and only if it refers to everything that the first term does not refer to. Composition, fallacy of To think that what holds true of a group of things taken individually necessarily holds true of the same things taken collectively. Conclusion In an argument, the claim for which a premise is supposed to give a reason. Conclusion indicator A word or phrase (e.g., therefore ) that ordinarily indicates the presence of the conclusion of an argument. Conditional claim A claim that state-of-affairs A cannot hold without state-of-affairs B holding as well e.g., If A, then B. The A-part of the claim is called the antecedent; the B-part is called the consequent. Conditional proof A deduction for a conditional claim If P, then Q that proceeds by assuming that P is true and then proving that, on that assumption, Q must also be true. conditio sine qua non A condition without which it could not be. Often referred to as a but for cause. Confidence level A quantitative expression of the probability that the random variation found from random sample to random sample will lie within the error margin. Conflicting claims Two claims that cannot both be correct. Confusing explanations and excuses, fallacy of Mistaking an explanation of something for an attempt to excuse it. Conjunction A compound claim made from two simpler claims. A conjunction is true if and only if both of the simpler claims that compose it are true. Consequent See conditional claim. Consequentialism In moral reasoning, the view that the consequences of a decision, deed, or policy determine its moral value. 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. Contradictory claims Two claims that are exact opposites that is, they could not both be true at the same time and could not both be false at the same time.

3 GLOSSARY 503 Contrapositive The claim that results from switching the places of the subject and predicate terms in a categorical claim and replacing both terms with complementary terms. Contrary analogue In an argument from analogy, an analogue which does not have the attribute of interest. Contrary claims Two claims that could not both be true at the same time but could both be false at the same time. Control group See controlled cause-to-effect experiment. Controlled cause-to-effect experiment An experiment designed to test whether something is a causal factor for a given effect. Basically, in such an experiment two groups are essentially alike, except that the members of one group, the experimental group, are exposed to the suspected causal factor, and the members of the other group, the control group, are not. The effect must be found to occur with significantly more frequency in the experimental group for the suspected causal agent to be considered a causal factor for the effect. Converse The converse of a categorical claim is the claim that results from switching the places of the subject and predicate terms. Covariation The accompaniment of variations in one phenomenon by variations in another phenomenon. Critical thinking We think critically when we rationally evaluate our own or others thinking. cum hoc, ergo propter hoc The fallacy of thinking that correlation or covariation between two variables proves that one causes the other. Deduction (proof) A numbered sequence of truthfunctional symbolizations, each member of which validly follows from earlier members by one of the truth-functional rules. Deductive argument An argument intended to prove or demonstrate, rather than merely support, a conclusion. Definition by example Pointing to, naming, or otherwise identifying one or more examples of the term being defined; also called ostensive definition. Definition by synonym Giving another word or phrase that means the same thing as the term being defined. Denying the antecedent An argument consisting of a conditional claim as one premise, a claim that denies the antecedent of the conditional as a second premise, and a claim that denies the consequent of the conditional as the conclusion. Denying the consequent See modus tollens. Deontologism See duty theory. Dependent premises Premises that depend on one another as support for their conclusion. If the assumption that a premise is false cancels the support another provides for a conclusion, the premises are dependent. Disinterested party A person who has no stake in our belief or disbelief in a claim. See interested party. Disjunction A compound claim made up of two simpler claims. A disjunction is false only if both of the simpler claims that make it up are false. Divine command theory The view that our moral duty (what s right and wrong) is dictated by God. Division, fallacy of To think that what holds true of a group of things taken collectively necessarily holds true of the same things taken individually. Downplayer An expression used to play down or diminish the importance of something. Duty theory 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. Also called deontologism. Dysphemism A word or phrase used to produce a negative effect on a reader s or listener s attitude about something or to minimize the positive associations the thing may have. Emotive meaning The positive or negative associations of a word; a word s rhetorical force. Envy, argument from Trying to induce acceptance of a claim by arousing feelings of envy. Equivalent claims Two claims are equivalent if and only if they would be true in all and exactly the same circumstances. Error margin Expression of the limit of random variation among random samples of a population. Ethical altruism The moral doctrine that discounts one s own happiness as being of lesser value than the happiness of others. Ethical egoism The idea that, if an act produces more happiness for oneself than will the alternatives, then it is the right thing to do. Euphemism An agreeable or inoffensive expression that is substituted for an expression that may offend the hearer or suggest something unpleasant. Experimental group See controlled cause-to-effect experiment. Expert A person who, through training, education, or experience, has special knowledge or ability in a subject. Expertise An unusual knowledge or ability in a given subject, most often due to specialized experience or education. Explanation A claim or set of claims intended to make another claim, object, event, or state of affairs intelligible. Explanatory analogy An analogy that is used to explain. Explanatory definition A definition used to explain, illustrate, or disclose important aspects of a difficult concept. Extension The set of things to which a term applies. Fact vs. opinion Sometimes people refer to true objective claims as facts, and use the word opinion to designate any claim that is subjective. Fallacy An argument in which the reasons advanced for a claim fail to warrant acceptance of that claim.

4 504 GLOSSARY Fallacy of anecdotal evidence A version of hasty generalization in which the sample is a story. Often used in an attempt to rebut a general claim. See also appeal to anecdote. Fallacy of composition Concluding that, because each member of a group has a certain property, therefore the group as a whole must have that property. Fallacy of division Concluding that, because a claim about a group taken collectively is true, therefore the same claim is true about members of the group taken individually. False consensus effect Assuming that the views held by members of our group are held by society at large. False dilemma This pattern of fallacious reasoning: X is true because either X is true or Y is true, and Y isn t, said when X and Y could both be false. Force, argument by Using a threat rather than legitimate argument to support a conclusion. Fundamental attribution error The tendency to not appreciate that others behavior is as much constrained by events and circumstances as our own would be if we were in their position. Gambler s fallacy Believing that recent past events in a series can influence the outcome of the next event in the series is fallacious when the events have a predictable ratio of results, as flipping a coin. Generality Lack of detail and/or specificity. The less detail a claim provides, the more general it is. General causal claim A statement to the effect that occurrences of one type cause occurrences of another type. General claim A statement that refers to multiple members of a population nonspecifically. Generalization This term is used to refer to a general claim or to an inductive generalization from a sample. Genetic fallacy Rejecting a claim on the basis of its origin or history. Glowing generality A vague generality couched in language with strongly positive associations. Good deductive argument An argument whose premises being true would mean the conclusion absolutely must be true. Good inductive argument An argument whose premises being true would mean the conclusion probably is true. 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. Groupthink fallacy Fallacy that occurs when someone lets identification with a group cloud reason and deliberation when arriving at a position on an issue. Guilt trip Trying to get someone to accept a claim by making him or her feel guilty for not accepting it. Harm principle The claim that the only way to justify a restriction on a person s freedom is to show that the restriction prevents harm to other people. Hasty generalization, fallacy of Overestimating the strength of an argument based on a small sample. Heuristic A rule of thumb employed unconsciously by people when they estimate probabilities. In psychology, the field known as heuristics and biases was originated by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. Horse laugh A pattern of fallacious reasoning in which ridicule is disguised as a reason for rejecting a claim. Hyperbole Extravagant overstatement. Hypothesis A causal explanation offered for further investigation or testing. Hypothetical imperative Kant s term for a command that is binding only if one is interested in a certain result. Illicit inductive conversion An argument of the form Most Xs are Ys; therefore, most Ys are Xs. Inconsistency ad hominem The illogical idea that you rebut an opponent s position by showing that he or she didn t always subscribe to it. Indirect proof Proof of a claim by demonstrating that its negation is false, absurd, or self-contradictory. Inductive analogical argument See analogical argument. Inductive argument from analogy See argument from analogy. Inductive generalization from a Deriving a conclusion about a population from a consideration of a sample. Inductive syllogism See statistical syllogism. Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) A form of inductive reasoning in which the best explanation for a phenomenon is concluded to be the proper explanation of the phenomenon. In-group bias A predisposition to find fault with outsiders. Initial plausibility One s rough assessment of how credible a claim seems. Innuendo An insinuation of something deprecatory. Intension The set of characteristics a thing must have for a term correctly to apply to it. Interested party A person who stands to gain from one s belief in a claim. See disinterested party. Invalid argument An argument that isn t valid. Issue A point that is or might be disputed, debated, or wondered about. Essentially, a question. Knowledge If you believe a claim, have an argument for it that is beyond reasonable doubt, and have no reason to think you are mistaken, you may be said to have knowledge that the claim is true. Law of large numbers A rule stating that the larger the number of chance-determined, repetitious events considered, the closer the alternatives will approach predictable ratios. Example: The more times you flip a coin, the closer the results will approach 50 percent heads and 50 percent tails.

7 GLOSSARY 507 Rhetorical explanation An explanation intended to influence attitudes or affect behavior; such explanations often make use of images with positive or negative emotional associations. Rhetorical force See emotive meaning. Sample A subset of a population. Sample size Sample size can affect the size of the error margin or the confidence level of inductive generalizations from a sample. Sampling frame A precise definition of a sample or attribute, that makes it unambiguous whether any given thing is a member of the sample and has the attribute. Scapegoating Placing the blame for some bad effect on a person or group of people who are not really responsible for it but who provide an easy target for animosity. Scare tactics Trying to scare someone into accepting or rejecting a claim. A common form includes merely describing a frightening scenario rather than offering evidence that some activity will cause it. Self-contradictory claim A claim that is analytically false. Self-selection A situation where the members of a sample are there because they themselves chose to be there. Self-selection fallacy Overestimating the probability of a conclusion derived from a self-selected sample Semantically ambiguous claim An ambiguous claim whose ambiguity is due to the ambiguity of a word or phrase in the claim. Semantic ambiguity Ambiguity produced by the inclusion of an ambiguous word or phrase. Significant mention See paralipsis. Slanter A linguistic device used to affect opinions, attitudes, or behavior without argumentation. Slanters rely heavily on the suggestive power of words and phrases to convey and evoke favorable and unfavorable images. Slippery slope A form of fallacious reasoning in which it is assumed that some event must inevitably follow from some other but in which no argument is made for the inevitability. Smoke screen An irrelevant topic or consideration introduced into a discussion to divert attention from the original issue. Social utility A focus on what is good for society (usually in terms of overall happiness) when deciding on a course of action. See also principle of utility. Sound argument A valid argument whose premises are true. Spin A type of rhetorical device, often in the form of a red herring or complicated euphemism, to disguise a politician s statement or action that might otherwise be perceived in an unfavorable light. Square of opposition A table of the logical relationships between two categorical claims that have the same subject and predicate terms. Standard-form categorical claim Any claim that results from putting words or phrases that name classes in the blanks of one of the following structures: All are ; No are ; Some are ; and Some are not. Stare decisis Letting the decision stand. Going by precedent. Statistically significant From a statistical point of view, probably not due to chance. Statistical regression In layman s terms statistical regression is the fact that if on one measurement the values of a variable are on average exceptionally high or low, then on a subsequent measurement the average will be closer to the norm. In other words, the exceptional average will regress toward the normal average on the subsequent measurement. Statistical syllogism A syllogism having this form: Such-and-such proportion of Xs are Ys. This is an X. Therefore this is a Y. Stereotype An oversimplified generalization about the members of a class. Stipulative definition A definition (of a word) that is specific to a particular context. Straw man A type of fallacious reasoning in which someone ignores an opponent s actual position and presents in its place a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of that position. Stronger/weaker arguments The more likely the premise of an inductive argument makes the conclusion, the stronger the argument, and the less likely it makes the conclusion, the weaker the argument. Subcontrary claims Two claims that can both be true at the same time but cannot both be false at the same time. Subject term The noun or noun phrase that refers to the first class mentioned in a standard-form categorical claim. Subjective claim A claim not subject to meaningful dispute if the speaker thinks it is true. See Subjective statement. Subjective expression An expression you can use pretty much as you please and still be using it correctly. Subjective issue See Subjective question. Subjective question A question that calls for a subjective opinion for an answer. Subjective statement A statement which is made true by the speaker s thinking it is true. Subjectivist fallacy This pattern of fallacious reasoning: Well, X may be true for you, but it isn t true for me, said with the intent of dismissing or rejecting X. Syllogism A deductive argument with two premises. Syntactically ambiguous claim An ambiguous claim whose ambiguity is due to the structure of the claim.

8 508 GLOSSARY Synthetic claim A claim whose truth value is not known by simply understanding the claim an observation of some sort is also required. Contrast with analytic claim. Term A noun or noun phrase. Tradition, argument from Arguing that a claim is true on the grounds that it is traditional to believe it is true. Truth In this book we use the concept in a commonsense way: A claim is true if it is free from error. Truth-functional equivalence Two claims are truth-functionally equivalent if and only if they have exactly the same truth table. Truth-functional logic A system of logic that specifies the logical relationships among truthfunctional claims claims whose truth values depend solely upon the truth values of their simplest component parts. In particular, truthfunctional logic deals with the logical functions of the terms not, and, or, if... then, and so on. Truth table A table that lists all possible combinations of truth values for the claim variables in a symbolized claim or argument and then specifies the truth value of the claim or claims for each of those possible combinations. Two wrongs make a right This pattern of fallacious reasoning: It s acceptable for A to do X to B because B would do X to A, said where A s doing X to B is not necessary to prevent B s doing X to A. Utilitarianism The moral position that, if an act will produce more happiness than its alternatives, that act is the right thing to do, and if the act will produce less happiness than its alternatives, it would be wrong to do it in place of an alternative that would produce more happiness. Vague claim A claim that lacks sufficient precision to convey the information appropriate to its use. Vague generality A general statement too vague to be meaningful for practical purposes. Vagueness A word or phrase is vague if the group of things to which it applies has borderline cases. Valid argument An argument for which it is not possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion false. See also good deductive argument. Value judgment A claim that assesses the merit, desirability, or praiseworthiness of someone or something. Also called a normative or a prescriptive statement. Variable Something that varies. In deductive reasoning, the most important variables are terms, claims, and arguments. In inductive generalizing from samples, inductive arguments from analogy, and arguments for causal claims, the most important variables are attributes. Venn diagram A graphic means of representing a categorical claim or categorical syllogism by assigning classes to overlapping circles. Invented by English mathematician John Venn ( ). 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. Weak analogy Overestimating the probability of a conclusion derived from an argument from analogy, a fallacy. Weak argument See stronger/weaker arguments. Weaseler An expression used to protect a claim from criticism by weakening it. Wishful thinking Accepting a claim because you want it to be true, or rejecting it because you don t want it to be true. Worse than average illusion See better than average illusion.

9 Answers, Suggestions, and Tips for Triangle Exercises Chapter 1: Critical Thinking Basics Exercise An argument consists of two parts, one of which is intended to provide a reason for accepting the other part. 4. F 7. T 10. F. As an example of an opinion that isn t subjective, we (the authors) are of the opinion there is life somewhere else in the universe. If there is life, our opinion is true. If there isn t, then it is false. We don t know whether our opinion is true or false, but we do know that it is one or the other, and we know that whether it is true or false is independent of what we think. 13. c. The first order of business is to determine what the issue is. 16. F. The only foolproof way we know of avoiding errors in thinking is to not think at all. 19. d Exercise This item belongs in one group. 4. This item belongs in the same group as item This belongs in a different group from 1 and This belongs in the same group as 1 and 4. Exercise Not objective 4. Not objective 7. Not objective 10. Objective Exercise Subjective 4. Subjective 7. Not subjective 10. Not subjective, unless the speaker intends to imply that Kerry s chin is unattractive, in which case the assertion would be subjective. Exercise Argument 4. Not an argument 7. No arguments here 10. Our conclusion is that this is an argument. Exercise Does not contain an argument. 4. Argument, whose conclusion is that computers will never be able to converse intelligently through speech. 7. Argument, whose conclusion is that chemicals in teething rings and soft plastic toys may cause cancer. 10. Does not contain an argument. Exercise a 4. c 7. b 10. b Exercise We (the authors) think we probably tend to overestimate the probability of types of events that are fresh in our minds (availability heuristic). 4. If we were in Jamela s position, we would want to get little Priglet. As a result, we would have a tendency to think that arguments in favor of our getting Priglet outweighed arguments against doing so. This is belief bias. Exercise Contains an argument whose conclusion is the stock market probably will go down. 4. Contains an argument whose conclusion is that probably more women than men are upset by pornography. 7. Does not contain an argument. 10. Subtle, but the speaker is giving a reason for thinking AI is the best talent show on TV. So the passage contains an argument whose conclusion is that contention. Exercise a 4. e. The issue is whether the United States should realize that reliance on imprisonment is not an effective method of reducing crime. 7. e. The issue is whether it is surprising that the winner of this year s spelling bee is a straight A student whose favorite subject is science.

11 ANSWERS, SUGGESTIONS, AND TIPS FOR TRIANGLE EXERCISES Premise: Presbyterians are not fundamentalists. Premise: All born-again Christians are fundamentalists. Conclusion: No born-again Christians are Presbyterians. 10. Premise: The clunk comes only when I pedal. Conclusion: The problem is in the chain, the crank, or the pedals. Exercise Conclusion: There is a difference in the octane ratings between the two grades of gasoline. 4. Conclusion: Scrub jays can be expected to be aggressive when they re breeding. 7. Conclusion: Dogs are smarter than cats. 10. Unstated conclusion: She is not still interested in me. Exercise Deductive demonstration 4. Inductive support 7. Inductive support 10. Deductive demonstration Exercise b 4. b 7. b 10. b Exercise Inductive 4. True 7. Deductive 10. Inductive 13. T 17. F Exercise Deductive demonstration 2. Inductive support 4. Inductive support 7. Two arguments here. In the first argument, if the speaker is assuming that the universe s not having arisen by chance increases the probability that God exists, then his or her argument is inductive. Likewise, in the second argument, if the speaker is assuming that an increase in the number of believing physicists increases the probability that God exists, then his or her argument is inductive. 8. Inductive support Exercise Separate arguments 6. Separate arguments 9. Separate arguments 10. Separate arguments 13. Does not contain separate arguments Exercise To explain 4. To explain 7. To explain 9. To argue Exercise a 4. a 7. a 10. a Exercise Anyone who keeps his or her word is a person of good character. 4. One cannot murder someone without being in the same room. 7. Anyone who commits murder should be executed. 10. All squeaking fans need oil. Exercises Puddles everywhere usually indicate a recent rain. 4. The next day after a week of cold weather usually is cold. 7. Having leftovers is an indication that a party wasn t successful. 10. My cold probably would not have disappeared like magic if I had not taken Zicam. Exercise Exercise Your distributor is the problem. 2 There s no current at the spark plugs. 3 If there s no current at the plugs, then either your alternator is shot or your distributor is defective.

### Philosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI

Philosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI Precising definition Theoretical definition Persuasive definition Syntactic definition Operational definition 1. Are questions about defining a phrase

### CRITICAL THINKING. Formal v Informal Fallacies

CRITICAL THINKING FAULTY REASONING (VAUGHN CH. 5) LECTURE PROFESSOR JULIE YOO Formal v Informal Fallacies Irrelevant Premises Genetic Fallacy Composition Division Appeal to the Person (ad hominem/tu quoque)

### Logical (formal) fallacies

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

### Video: How does understanding whether or not an argument is inductive or deductive help me?

Page 1 of 10 10b Learn how to evaluate verbal and visual arguments. Video: How does understanding whether or not an argument is inductive or deductive help me? Download transcript Three common ways to

### Christ-Centered Critical Thinking. Lesson 7: Logical Fallacies

Christ-Centered Critical Thinking Lesson 7: Logical Fallacies 1 Learning Outcomes In this lesson we will: 1.Define logical fallacy using the SEE-I. 2.Understand and apply the concept of relevance. 3.Define,

### Unit 4. Reason as a way of knowing. Tuesday, March 4, 14

Unit 4 Reason as a way of knowing I. Reasoning At its core, reasoning is using what is known as building blocks to create new knowledge I use the words logic and reasoning interchangeably. Technically,

### CHAPTER 13: UNDERSTANDING PERSUASIVE. What is persuasion: process of influencing people s belief, attitude, values or behavior.

Logos Ethos Pathos Chapter 13 CHAPTER 13: UNDERSTANDING PERSUASIVE What is persuasion: process of influencing people s belief, attitude, values or behavior. Persuasive speaking: process of doing so in

### Practice Test Three Spring True or False True = A, False = B

Practice Test Three Spring 2015 True or False True = A, False = B 1. A sound argument is a valid deductive argument with true premisses. 2. A conclusion is a statement of support. 3. An easy way to determine

### HANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.)

1 HANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.) I. ARGUMENT RECOGNITION Important Concepts An argument is a unit of reasoning that attempts to prove that a certain idea is true by

### Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments

Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments Week 4: Propositional Logic and Truth Tables Lecture 4.1: Introduction to deductive logic Deductive arguments = presented as being valid, and successful only

### Practice Test Three Fall True or False True = A, False = B

Practice Test Three Fall 2015 True or False True = A, False = B 1. The inclusive "or" means "A or B or both A and B." 2. The conclusion contains both the major term and the middle term. 3. "If, then" statements

### 14.6 Speaking Ethically and Avoiding Fallacies L E A R N I N G O B JE C T I V E S

14.6 Speaking Ethically and Avoiding Fallacies L E A R N I N G O B JE C T I V E S 1. Demonstrate the importance of ethics as part of the persuasion process. 2. Identify and provide examples of eight common

### In view of the fact that IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES

IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES Instructions: Determine whether the following are propositions. If some are not propositions, see if they can be rewritten as propositions. (1) I have a very refined sense of smell.

### Philosophical Arguments

Philosophical Arguments An introduction to logic and philosophical reasoning. Nathan D. Smith, PhD. Houston Community College Nathan D. Smith. Some rights reserved You are free to copy this book, to distribute

### Logical Fallacies RHETORICAL APPEALS

Logical Fallacies RHETORICAL APPEALS Rhetorical Appeals Ethos Appeals to credibility Pathos Appeals to emotion Logos Appeals to logic Structure of an Analysis/Argument Arguments operate under logic Your

### SHORT ANSWER. Write the word or phrase that best completes each statement or answers the question.

Exam Name SHORT ANSWER. Write the word or phrase that best completes each statement or answers the question. Draw a Venn diagram for the given sets. In words, explain why you drew one set as a subset of

### MCQ IN TRADITIONAL LOGIC. 1. Logic is the science of A) Thought. B) Beauty. C) Mind. D) Goodness

MCQ IN TRADITIONAL LOGIC FOR PRIVATE REGISTRATION TO BA PHILOSOPHY PROGRAMME 1. Logic is the science of-----------. A) Thought B) Beauty C) Mind D) Goodness 2. Aesthetics is the science of ------------.

### 2/21/2014. FOUR WAYS OF KNOWING (Justifiable True Belief) 1. Sensory input; 2. Authoritative knowledge; 3. Logic and reason; 4. Faith and intuition

FOUR WAYS OF KNOWING (Justifiable True Belief) 1. Sensory input; 2. Authoritative knowledge; 3. Logic and reason; 4. Faith and intuition Argumentative Fallacies The Logic of Writing and Debate from http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html

### I. Claim: a concise summary, stated or implied, of an argument s main idea, or point. Many arguments will present multiple claims.

Basics of Argument and Rhetoric Although arguing, speaking our minds, and getting our points across are common activities for most of us, applying specific terminology to these activities may not seem

### Logic: A Brief Introduction. Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University

Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University 2012 CONTENTS Part I Critical Thinking Chapter 1 Basic Training 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Logic, Propositions and Arguments 1.3 Deduction and Induction

### LOGICAL FALLACIES/ERRORS OF ARGUMENT

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

### Argument and Persuasion. Stating Opinions and Proposals

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

### Argument Writing. Whooohoo!! Argument instruction is necessary * Argument comprehension is required in school assignments, standardized testing, job

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

### This fallacy gets its name from the Latin phrase "post hoc, ergo propter hoc," which translates as "after this, therefore because of this.

So what do fallacies look like? For each fallacy listed, there is a definition or explanation, an example, and a tip on how to avoid committing the fallacy in your own arguments. Hasty generalization Definition:

### 1. To arrive at the truth we have to reason correctly. 2. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. B. DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

I. LOGIC AND ARGUMENTATION 1 A. LOGIC 1. To arrive at the truth we have to reason correctly. 2. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. 3. It doesn t attempt to determine how people in fact reason. 4.

### Logical Fallacies. Define the following logical fallacies and provide an example for each.

Logical Fallacies An argument is a chain of reasons that a person uses to support a claim or a conclusion. To use argument well, you need to know 1) how to draw logical conclusions from sound evidence

### Selections from Aristotle s Prior Analytics 41a21 41b5

Lesson Seventeen The Conditional Syllogism Selections from Aristotle s Prior Analytics 41a21 41b5 It is clear then that the ostensive syllogisms are effected by means of the aforesaid figures; these considerations

### Common Logical Fallacies

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

What is an argument? PHIL 110 Lecture on Chapter 3 of How to think about weird things An argument is a collection of two or more claims, one of which is the conclusion and the rest of which are the premises.

### Some Templates for Beginners: Template Option 1 I am analyzing A in order to argue B. An important element of B is C. C is significant because.

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

### Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning Strong Syllogism

Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning................... 3 1.1.1 Strong Syllogism......................... 3 1.1.2 Weak Syllogism.......................... 4 1.1.3 Transitivity

### Fallacies. It is particularly easy to slip up and commit a fallacy when you have strong feelings about your. The Writing Center

The Writing Center Fallacies Like 40 people like this. What this handout is about This handout discusses common logical fallacies that you may encounter in your own writing or the writing of others. The

### The Philosopher s World Cup

The Philosopher s World Cup Monty Python & the Flying Circus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vv3qgagck&feature=related What is an argument? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqfkti6gn9y What is an argument?

### Logical Fallacies. Continuing our foray into the world of Argument. Courtesy of:

Logical Fallacies Continuing our foray into the world of Argument Courtesy of: http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html What is Fallacy? Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. First,

### What is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 Pan-Hellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece

What is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 Pan-Hellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece Outline of this Talk 1. What is the nature of logic? Some history

### PHI 1700: Global Ethics

PHI 1700: Global Ethics Session 3 February 11th, 2016 Harman, Ethics and Observation 1 (finishing up our All About Arguments discussion) A common theme linking many of the fallacies we covered is that

### Logic and Nosich s Elements

1 Logic and Nosich s Elements Most of you have learned something about logical fallacies (PHG pp. 37-38, WA ch. 5, and many other sources). These are traps in making a point that disconnect or misuse the

### A Brief Introduction to Key Terms

1 A Brief Introduction to Key Terms 5 A Brief Introduction to Key Terms 1.1 Arguments Arguments crop up in conversations, political debates, lectures, editorials, comic strips, novels, television programs,

### Logic Practice Test 1

Logic Practice Test 1 Name True or False 1. Implying is said to be analogous to hearing. 2. Opinions can be mistaken, but knowledge cannot. 3. According to the book, whatever a person thinks is true is

### Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak.

On Interpretation By Aristotle Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak. First we must define the terms 'noun' and 'verb', then the terms 'denial' and 'affirmation',

### Course Learning Outcomes for Unit V

UNIT V STUDY GUIDE Designing and Evaluating Your Own Learning Reading Assignment Chapter 8: Discover How the Best Thinkers Learn Chapter 9: Redefine Grades As Levels of Thinking and Learning Suggested

### AICE Thinking Skills Review. How to Master Paper 2

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

### Fallacies are deceptive errors of thinking.

Fallacies are deceptive errors of thinking. A good argument should: 1. be deductively valid (or inductively strong) and have all true premises; 2. have its validity and truth-of-premises be as evident

### Logic: A Brief Introduction

Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University PART III - Symbolic Logic Chapter 7 - Sentential Propositions 7.1 Introduction What has been made abundantly clear in the previous discussion

### I. What is an Argument?

I. What is an Argument? In philosophy, an argument is not a dispute or debate, but rather a structured defense of a claim (statement, assertion) about some topic. When making an argument, one does not

### 2016 Philosophy. Higher. Finalised Marking Instructions

National Qualifications 06 06 Philosophy Higher Finalised Marking Instructions Scottish Qualifications Authority 06 The information in this publication may be reproduced to support SQA qualifications only

### Relevance. Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true

Relevance Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true Premises are irrelevant when they do not 1 Non Sequitur Latin for it does

### Lemon Bay High School AP Language and Composition ENC 1102 Mr. Hertz

Lemon Bay High School AP Language and Composition ENC 1102 Mr. Hertz Please take out a few pieces of paper and a pen or pencil. Write your name, the date, your class period, and a title at the top of the

### Practical Rationality and Ethics. Basic Terms and Positions

Practical Rationality and Ethics Basic Terms and Positions Practical reasons and moral ought Reasons are given in answer to the sorts of questions ethics seeks to answer: What should I do? How should I

### On Interpretation. Section 1. Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill. Part 1

On Interpretation Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill Section 1 Part 1 First we must define the terms noun and verb, then the terms denial and affirmation, then proposition and sentence. Spoken words

### Basic Concepts and Skills!

Basic Concepts and Skills! Critical Thinking tests rationales,! i.e., reasons connected to conclusions by justifying or explaining principles! Why do CT?! Answer: Opinions without logical or evidential

### INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms

1 GLOSSARY INTERMEDIATE LOGIC BY JAMES B. NANCE INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms This glossary includes terms that are defined in the text in the lesson and on the page noted. It does not include

### HOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT

What does it mean to provide an argument for a statement? To provide an argument for a statement is an activity we carry out both in our everyday lives and within the sciences. We provide arguments for

### Logic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE

CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE Section 1. A Mediate Inference is a proposition that depends for proof upon two or more other propositions, so connected together by one or

### 5: Preliminaries to the Argument

5: Preliminaries to the Argument In this chapter, we set forth the logical structure of the argument we will use in chapter six in our attempt to show that Nfc is self-refuting. Thus, our main topics in

### Logical Fallacies. Continuing our foray into the world of Argument. Courtesy of:

Logical Fallacies Continuing our foray into the world of Argument Courtesy of: http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html What is an argument? An argument is not the same thing as a contradiction..

### Chapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111)

Chapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111) Neils Bohr (1885 1962) to Einstein: You are not thinking. You are merely being logical. Reason is one of the four ways of knowing: Perception Language Emotion

### MISSOURI S FRAMEWORK FOR CURRICULAR DEVELOPMENT IN MATH TOPIC I: PROBLEM SOLVING

Prentice Hall Mathematics:,, 2004 Missouri s Framework for Curricular Development in Mathematics (Grades 9-12) TOPIC I: PROBLEM SOLVING 1. Problem-solving strategies such as organizing data, drawing a

### Martha C. Nussbaum (4) Outline:

Another problem with people who fail to examine themselves is that they often prove all too easily influenced. When a talented demagogue addressed the Athenians with moving rhetoric but bad arguments,

### Hello, AP Scholars! Welcome to AP English Language and Composition.

Mrs. Mary Vargas ~ C05 AP English Language and Composition Summer Read Assignment 2016-2017 Toms River High School North Old Freehold Rd. Toms River, NJ 08753 mvargas@trschools.com * vargasgooden913@gmail.com

### PHLA10 Reason and Truth Exercise 1

Y e P a g e 1 Exercise 1 Pg. 17 1. When is an idea or statement valid? (trick question) A statement or an idea cannot be valid; they can only be true or false. Being valid or invalid are properties of

### TWO APPROACHES TO INSTRUMENTAL RATIONALITY

TWO APPROACHES TO INSTRUMENTAL RATIONALITY AND BELIEF CONSISTENCY BY JOHN BRUNERO JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY VOL. 1, NO. 1 APRIL 2005 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT JOHN BRUNERO 2005 I N SPEAKING

### THE FREGE-GEACH PROBLEM AND KALDERON S MORAL FICTIONALISM. Matti Eklund Cornell University

THE FREGE-GEACH PROBLEM AND KALDERON S MORAL FICTIONALISM Matti Eklund Cornell University [me72@cornell.edu] Penultimate draft. Final version forthcoming in Philosophical Quarterly I. INTRODUCTION In his

### Unit. Categorical Syllogism. What is a syllogism? Types of Syllogism

Unit 8 Categorical yllogism What is a syllogism? Inference or reasoning is the process of passing from one or more propositions to another with some justification. This inference when expressed in language

### Faith indeed tells what the senses do not tell, but not the contrary of what they see. It is above them and not contrary to them.

19 Chapter 3 19 CHAPTER 3: Logic Faith indeed tells what the senses do not tell, but not the contrary of what they see. It is above them and not contrary to them. The last proceeding of reason is to recognize

### Theory of Knowledge. 5. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree?

Theory of Knowledge 5. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree? Candidate Name: Syed Tousif Ahmed Candidate Number: 006644 009

### ISSA Proceedings 1998 Wilson On Circular Arguments

ISSA Proceedings 1998 Wilson On Circular Arguments 1. Introduction In his paper Circular Arguments Kent Wilson (1988) argues that any account of the fallacy of begging the question based on epistemic conditions

### How To Recognize and Avoid Them. Joseph M Conlon Technical Advisor, AMCA

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

### II Plenary discussion of Expertise and the Global Warming debate.

Thinking Straight Critical Reasoning WS 9-1 May 27, 2008 I. A. (Individually ) review and mark the answers for the assignment given on the last pages: (two points each for reconstruction and evaluation,

### A. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November

Lecture 9: Propositional Logic I Philosophy 130 1 & 3 November 2016 O Rourke & Gibson I. Administrative A. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November B. I am working on the group

### Take Home Exam #1. PHI 1700: Global Ethics Prof. Lauren R. Alpert

PHI 1700: Global Ethics Prof. Lauren R. Alpert Name: Date: Take Home Exam #1 Instructions (Read Before Proceeding!) Material for this exam is from class sessions 2-8. Please write your answers clearly

### Ramsey s belief > action > truth theory.

Ramsey s belief > action > truth theory. Monika Gruber University of Vienna 11.06.2016 Monika Gruber (University of Vienna) Ramsey s belief > action > truth theory. 11.06.2016 1 / 30 1 Truth and Probability

### All About Arguments. I. What is an Argument? II. Identifying an Author s Argument

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)

### 1. Introduction Formal deductive logic Overview

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

### Philosophical Ethics. Distinctions and Categories

Philosophical Ethics Distinctions and Categories Ethics Remember we have discussed how ethics fits into philosophy We have also, as a 1 st approximation, defined ethics as philosophical thinking about

### Chapter 8 - Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms

Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall Stetson University Chapter 8 - Sentential ruth ables and Argument orms 8.1 Introduction he truth-value of a given truth-functional compound proposition depends

### 24.01: Classics of Western Philosophy

Mill s Utilitarianism I. Introduction Recall that there are four questions one might ask an ethical theory to answer: a) Which acts are right and which are wrong? Which acts ought we to perform (understanding

### Argument vs Persuasion vs Propaganda. So many terms...what do they all mean??

Argument vs Persuasion vs Propaganda So many terms...what do they all mean?? Learning Targets Argumentative Reading Unit LT 1: I can cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports what the text

### Ethics is subjective.

Introduction Scientific Method and Research Ethics Ethical Theory Greg Bognar Stockholm University September 22, 2017 Ethics is subjective. If ethics is subjective, then moral claims are subjective in

### 3.2: FAULTY REASONING AND PROPAGANDA. Ms. Hargen

3.2: FAULTY REASONING AND PROPAGANDA Ms. Hargen PROPAGANDA Persuasion that deliberately discourages people from thinking for themselves. It relies on one-sided or distorted arguments. HASTY GENERALIZATION

### Causal fallacies; Causation and experiments. Phil 12: Logic and Decision Making Winter 2010 UC San Diego 2/26/2010

Causal fallacies; Causation and experiments Phil 12: Logic and Decision Making Winter 2010 UC San Diego 2/26/2010 Review Diagramming causal relations - Variables as nodes (boxes) - Causal relations as

### A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS 0. Logic, Probability, and Formal Structure Logic is often divided into two distinct areas, inductive logic and deductive logic. Inductive logic is concerned

### Purdue OWL Logic in Argumentative Writing

Contributors: Ryan Weber, Allen Brizee. This resource covers using logic within writing, including logical vocabulary, logical fallacies, and other types of logos-based reasoning. This handout is designed

### Hume s emotivism. Michael Lacewing

Michael Lacewing Hume s emotivism Theories of what morality is fall into two broad families cognitivism and noncognitivism. The distinction is now understood by philosophers to depend on whether one thinks

### Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking M. Neil Browne and Stuart Keeley

Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking M. Neil Browne and Stuart Keeley A Decision Making and Support Systems Perspective by Richard Day M. Neil Browne and Stuart Keeley look to change

### Ayer and Quine on the a priori

Ayer and Quine on the a priori November 23, 2004 1 The problem of a priori knowledge Ayer s book is a defense of a thoroughgoing empiricism, not only about what is required for a belief to be justified

### Boghossian & Harman on the analytic theory of the a priori

Boghossian & Harman on the analytic theory of the a priori PHIL 83104 November 2, 2011 Both Boghossian and Harman address themselves to the question of whether our a priori knowledge can be explained in

### Argumentation. 2. What should we consider when making (or testing) an argument?

. 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

### The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism

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.

### The Conflict Between Authority and Autonomy from Robert Wolff, In Defense of Anarchism (1970)

The Conflict Between Authority and Autonomy from Robert Wolff, In Defense of Anarchism (1970) 1. The Concept of Authority Politics is the exercise of the power of the state, or the attempt to influence

### Suppose... Kant. The Good Will. Kant Three Propositions

Suppose.... Kant You are a good swimmer and one day at the beach you notice someone who is drowning offshore. Consider the following three scenarios. Which one would Kant says exhibits a good will? Even

### 5.6.1 Formal validity in categorical deductive arguments

Deductive arguments are commonly used in various kinds of academic writing. In order to be able to perform a critique of deductive arguments, we will need to understand their basic structure. As will be

### A Critique of Friedman s Critics Lawrence A. Boland

Revised final draft A Critique of Friedman s Critics Milton Friedman s essay The methodology of positive economics [1953] is considered authoritative by almost every textbook writer who wishes to discuss

### Six Sigma Prof. Dr. T. P. Bagchi Department of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur

Six Sigma Prof. Dr. T. P. Bagchi Department of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Lecture No. #05 Review of Probability and Statistics I Good afternoon, it is Tapan Bagchi again. I have

### J. L. Mackie The Subjectivity of Values

J. L. Mackie The Subjectivity of Values The following excerpt is from Mackie s The Subjectivity of Values, originally published in 1977 as the first chapter in his book, Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong.

### Rationalism. A. He, like others at the time, was obsessed with questions of truth and doubt

Rationalism I. Descartes (1596-1650) A. He, like others at the time, was obsessed with questions of truth and doubt 1. How could one be certain in the absence of religious guidance and trustworthy senses

### Take Home Exam #1. PHI 1700: Global Ethics Prof. Lauren R. Alpert

PHI 1700: Global Ethics Prof. Lauren R. Alpert Name: Date: Take Home Exam #1 Instructions (Read Before Proceeding!) Material for this exam is from class sessions 2-7. Please write your answers clearly