Logical (formal) fallacies
|
|
- Duane Sharp
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 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 often refers to a formal fallacy in a logical argument; that is, an invalid argument that is mistakenly thought to be valid. Often people talk about various kinds of rhetorical fallacies, writing or speech that appears to be based on an argument but is not logically entailed by premises. Research writing can also be prone to statistical fallacy: mistaken use of statistics, or conclusions based on misunderstanding statistics. Below I discuss a few common fallacies in academic writing. Logical (formal) fallacies Affirming the consequent. Implication is a valid form of logical argument. The truth of one idea (call it an antecedent, meaning it comes first) may imply a consequence. If the antecedent is true then the consequent (the thing that happens after or sometimes because of the antecedent) must be true. For example, if a person is murdered that person is dead. This is necessarily true because it is part of the meaning of murder. If Taro was murdered, we can conclude that he is dead. That is a valid argument from implication. But the opposite is not a valid argument: the truth of the consequent does not imply the truth of the antecedent. If Taro is dead, we cannot conclude that he was murdered; he might have died from a disease or an accident. The consequent does not imply the truth of the antecedent. Denying the antecedent. On the other hand, if an antecedent implies a consequent and that consequent is not true, then the antecedent must not be true. Think about the murder example again: if Taro was murdered, he is dead. If he is not dead, then we know that he was not murdered. But again the opposite is not a valid argument: a false antecedent does not imply a false consequent. Even if we know that Taro was not murdered, we don t know whether he is dead. He may be alive, but he may have died naturally or accidentally. Syllogistic fallacies We discussed syllogisms in class. In a syllogism, two premises add up to a conclusion. If the syllogism is valid and the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. Be careful, though: there are several fallacies that can make a syllogism invalid. VALID SYLLOGISMS All P is M. Some P is M. All P is M. All M is Q. All M is Q. No M is Q. (All M is not-q) Therefore, all P is Q. Therefore, some P is Q. Therefore P is not Q. Undistributed middle. All syllogisms must have a middle term that is distributed true for all in at least one premise. If the middle term is not distributed, the syllogism is not valid. NOT VALID SYLLOGISMS All P is M. Some P is M. All P is M. All Q is M. Some M is Q. Some M is not Q Therefore, all P is Q. Therefore, some P is Q. Therefore P is not Q.
2 We ve seen the first non-valid argument in class: All rabbits run fast; Usain Bolt runs fast. Therefore, Usain Bolt is a rabbit. I also mentioned an example of the second pattern: Some students in this class are women; some women are over 60 years old. Therefore, some students in this class are over 60 years old. Here is an example of the third pattern: All students in this class are graduate students. Some graduate students do not study logic. Therefore, students in this class do not study logic. None of the conclusions are proved true since the syllogisms are invalid. Four terms. A valid syllogism must have three terms, like the ones labeled P, M, and Q above. If the conclusion or one of the premises introduces a fourth term, it is not valid. Consider this argument: Socrates is a human. All humans are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is Japanese. The wrongness of that syllogism is obvious. But sometimes it can be hard to spot this fallacy when the same words express two different ideas. Consider the example below. Warm beer is better than nothing. Nothing is better than true love. Therefore, warm beer is better than true love. Although this looks like a valid syllogism of the kind we have seen before, the conclusion is not true. What went wrong? Notice that better than nothing ( 無いよりまし ) in the first premise does not mean the same thing as nothing is better ( 最高 ) in the second premise. Those two different meanings add up to a fallacy of four terms. Affirmative conclusion from negative premises or negative conclusion from affirmative premises. Two negative premises cannot entail an affirmative conclusion. Likewise, it is not valid to add negative meaning to an affirmative syllogism. NOT VALID SYLLOGISMS No P is M. Some P is M. No M is Q. All M is Q Therefore, all P is Q. Therefore some P is not Q. As an example of the first pattern consider this invalid syllogism: No rabbits are horses; no horses are birds. Therefore, all rabbits are birds. It is not valid to draw an affirmative conclusion from negative premises. Likewise, negative conclusions cannot be drawn from premises that contain no negative statement. Maybe you can think of examples that seem to be true; for example: Some people are doctors; all doctors are university graduates. Therefore, some people are not university graduates. But the truth of that conclusion is only accidental. It is not a valid conclusion from the syllogism. Consider this example, which uses the same logic: Some army officers are generals; all generals are soldiers. Therefore, some army officers are not soldiers. That s not valid and it s not true. Remember: a valid syllogism allows us to deduce that the conclusion is true, but truth (matching the world) is not the same as validity (entailment from argument).
3 Rhetorical (informal) fallacies Writers sometimes argue, meaning they try to convince the reader that what they say is right, without a logical argument in the sense of a set of premises that imply the truth of, or support the likelihood of their conclusion. Here are some examples of rhetorical fallacy. Appeal to authority. Writers may imply, or readers may assume, that something is true because a famous, smart, or respected person said it. There is, however, no necessary link between the authority of a speaker and the truth of what s/he says. Similarly a bandwagon argument suggests that if many people believe the same thing, that belief must be true. Again, there is no necessary link between popularity or fame and truth. Ad hominem. When two people or groups disagree, an ad hominem argument may appear: arguing that the person saying something is bad, so what s/he says must not be true. Just as the goodness of a speaker does not entail the truth of what s/he says, the badness of a speaker does not entail falseness. Straw man argument consists of misrepresenting either a conclusion or a logical argument in order to counter it. A scholar may reject another scholar s conclusion by showing either that an argument was invalid or its premises are not true. If instead the scholar creates an invalid argument that reaches the same conclusion in order to reject that conclusion, he has created a straw man argument. Begging the question or circular reasoning involve making the conclusion one of the premises. Consider this argument: Fundamentals of academic writing is a popular class. Most students like popular classes. Therefore, most students like fundamentals of academic writing. The conclusion and the first premise mean basically the same thing, even though the words are slightly different. Therefore, it is not actually an argument; it just states what the teacher hopes is true. (Note that in everyday English the phrase beg the question is sometimes used to mean cause to ask a question. That is not related to this fallacy.) Appeal to ignorance refers to the assumption that something not proved to be true must be false, or that something not proved to be false must be true. Neither of these is a valid assumption; something not proved might be true or false, but it s currently unknown. For example, there is no clear evidence that life exists on other planets, but that is not proof that no such life exists. It might not exist, or it might exist but be unknown to humans. (Note, however, that some kinds of absence can be used to support some kinds of inferences. For example if a doctor tests me for cancer cells and doesn t find any then it is likely, though not certain, that I do not have cancer.) And although it s not exactly a fallacy I will also share a warning from my former professor Lise Menn: Beware Procrustes bearing Occam s razor. Occam s razor is the valid suggestion (not a fallacy) that when two theories can account for the same data, it is best to assume the simpler of the two theories. But simple theories are not always correct. Procrustes is a character from a Greek myth who made everyone fit into the same bed by either stretching them or cutting off their legs. Scholars sometimes commit an error by cutting off some data in order to make it fit with a simple theory. For example, there is a simple theory that explains the evolution of large human brains, but this theory cannot explain variation in the size of other human-like species brains. In this case a more complex theory that explains all the data might be true, even though it fails the suggestion of Occam s razor.
4 Statistical fallacies Readers and writers sometimes get confused about the meaning of statistical analyses. This can lead scholars to claim things that are not supported by the analysis. Here are some statistical fallacies. Correlation is not causation. Correlation means that two values vary together. Causation means that a change in one variable causes a change in another. For example, an increase in demand for sugar can cause the price of sugar to increase. A common error is to assume that because values are correlated (for example, when one increases the other also increases) one must cause the other. Sometimes correlation is spurious or accidental. For example, rates of cancer and rates of autism have both increased over the past twenty years, but it is unlikely that these changes are related. Sometimes a third factor called a hidden variable or a confounding variable correlates with both variables. For example, drowning deaths are strongly correlated with ice cream sales; this is not because ice cream causes drowning but because both ice cream and swimming are most popular in summer. This is an example of a common informal logic fallacy called cum hoc ergo propter hoc with this therefore because of this. Correlation does not imply causation. On the other hand, it often suggests that a phenomenon might be worth investigating further to see if there is some hidden meaning behind the correlation. Significance versus significance. In everyday usage the word significant means important, noteworthy, or meaningful. But in statistics significant means unlikely to be a random error. The value p<0.01 calculated by a t-test essentially means that if our numbers were completely random, the difference we found would be seen less than one time in 100. People sometimes misunderstand, thinking that a statistically significant result must be important or meaningful. That is not necessarily the case. For example, say we give an intelligence test to 10 men and 10 women and find that the average IQ of the men is 105 while the average of the women is 107. This difference is not significant (p=0.15). But say we give the same test to 100 men and 100 women and find the same averages: 105 for men, 107 for women. This result is statistically significant (p<0.01), even though the result is no more or less meaningful. This is because a t-test is sensitive to small differences when sample sizes are large. Statistical significance allows us to reject a null hypothesis it tells us that there actually is a difference but it cannot indicate how important or meaningful that difference is. Base rate fallacy. When doing statistical tests, people often ignore the base rate or underlying probability and focus only on the probability of the test, leading them to under- or over-estimate their findings. For example, imagine that there are 200 werewolves in Nagoya. Luckily, I have a machine that can identify werewolves. The machine is 99% accurate, meaning it will misidentify a werewolf as human only 1% of the time, and misidentify a human as werewolf only 1% of the time. I point the machine at my neighbor and it says she is a werewolf. How confident can I be that she really is a werewolf? If I ignore the base rate, I may think that there is a 99% chance that she is a werewolf. But in fact, since there are about two million humans and only two hundred werewolves in Nagoya, the machine will wrongly identify about 20,000 humans as werewolves while accurately identifying 198 werewolves. There is actually less than 1% chance that the neighbor identified as a werewolf really is one. Biased samples. It is usually impossible or at least impractical to test every person or thing relevant to our research. Therefore, we usually select a sample and then generalize the results to a larger population. Such generalization is only valid, though, if the sample is representative of
5 the population. A random sample, in which participants are randomly selected from the whole population and subjects are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups when doing an experiment, can help ensure representative, unbiased samples. Using convenience samples, participants who are not randomly selected, can make the results less generalizable. For example, since many psychology studies are done by university professors, they often recruit university students as subjects. But since university students are not representative of the whole world (among other differences, they tend to be younger and better educated than average) the results cannot be generalized to all people. Similarly, medical research carried out in hospitals may choose subjects from among hospital patients and therefore ignore the large portion of the population who are not sick. Another form of sample bias is called self-selection or non-response bias. For example, if a sociologist sends a questionnaire to a random sample of people, some of those subjects might not answer. The sample becomes biased if the people who respond and the people who do not respond differ in some way. Similarly, if a family restaurant asks customers to rate their service it is likely that only people who are very happy or very unhappy with the restaurant will answer, so that the survey results will not represent the whole population of customers. Extrapolation fallacies. Research in many fields examines change over time (or across space, or over other variation). A common use of such results is to extrapolate to predict that the rate of change observed in the past will continue into the future. This can be useful, but it can lead to wrong predictions. For example, during the 2012 United States presidential campaign three opinion polls in September found that candidate Mitt Romney was becoming more popular each week, while President Barrack Obama was becoming less popular. News media predicted that this trend would continue and that Romney would win the election in November. In fact though, the trend changed in October: Obama became more popular, and he eventually won the election. Garbage-in-garbage-out is a phrase commonly used in computer science and information technology; it can also apply to statistics. It means that the value of an analysis (what comes out) is only as good as the value of the data that goes into it. Readers and writers often assume that statistical analyses are reliable and valid without questioning the quality of the data that was analyzed or the relevance of the analysis to the research question. If the data are not accurate or appropriate, statistical methods will not make them any more reliable. Finally, a word about charts. When statistical data are presented in chart form, even accurate numbers can give a false impression. Consider these two charts. Both of them show the exact same data: an increase from 35.0% to 39.5%. In the chart on the left that change looks very big, while on the right it looks small. That apparent difference is due to the scale of the charts, from on the right or from on the left. Choosing one of these charts rather than the other can give a very different impression of the same descriptive statistics. Be careful to present your data accurately and fairly.
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
More informationAs noted, a deductive argument is intended to provide logically conclusive support for its conclusion. We have certainty with deductive arguments in
As noted, a deductive argument is intended to provide logically conclusive support for its conclusion. We have certainty with deductive arguments in that if the premises of the argument are true, then
More informationAcademic argument does not mean conflict or competition; an argument is a set of reasons which support, or lead to, a conclusion.
ACADEMIC SKILLS THINKING CRITICALLY In the everyday sense of the word, critical has negative connotations. But at University, Critical Thinking is a positive process of understanding different points of
More informationWhat is a logical argument? What is deductive reasoning? Fundamentals of Academic Writing
What is a logical argument? What is deductive reasoning? Fundamentals of Academic Writing Logical relations Deductive logic Claims to provide conclusive support for the truth of a conclusion Inductive
More informationArgumentation Module: Philosophy Lesson 7 What do we mean by argument? (Two meanings for the word.) A quarrel or a dispute, expressing a difference
1 2 3 4 5 6 Argumentation Module: Philosophy Lesson 7 What do we mean by argument? (Two meanings for the word.) A quarrel or a dispute, expressing a difference of opinion. Often heated. A statement of
More informationPhilosophy 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
More informationHOW 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
More informationPhilosophical 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
More informationA R G U M E N T S I N A C T I O N
ARGUMENTS IN ACTION Descriptions: creates a textual/verbal account of what something is, was, or could be (shape, size, colour, etc.) Used to give you or your audience a mental picture of the world around
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 2. Background Material for the Exercise on Inference Indicators
Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics Critical Thinking Lecture 2 Background Material for the Exercise on Inference Indicators Inference-Indicators and the Logical Structure of an Argument 1. The Idea
More informationModule - 02 Lecturer - 09 Inferential Statistics - Motivation
Introduction to Data Analytics Prof. Nandan Sudarsanam and Prof. B. Ravindran Department of Management Studies and Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
More informationAugust Parish Life Survey. Saint Benedict Parish Johnstown, Pennsylvania
August 2018 Parish Life Survey Saint Benedict Parish Johnstown, Pennsylvania Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate Georgetown University Washington, DC Parish Life Survey Saint Benedict Parish
More information2016 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
More informationModule 9- Inductive and Deductive Reasoning
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Inquire: Types of Argumentative Reasoning Overview Sometimes, when we write an essay, we re setting out to write a really compelling and convincing argument. As we begin
More informationRelevance. 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
More informationPHI 1700: Global Ethics
PHI 1700: Global Ethics Session 2 February 4th, 2016 All About Arguments (Philosophy Basics) 1 What is an argument? Arguments are like the currency of philosophy: they are what philosophers exchange to
More informationARGUMENTS. Arguments. arguments
ARGUMENTS Arguments arguments 1 Argument Worksheet 1. An argument is a collection of propositions with one proposition, the conclusion, following from the other propositions, the premises. Inference is
More informationArtificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Artificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems Prof. Deepak Khemani Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Module 02 Lecture - 03 So in the last
More informationTake Home Exam #1. PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy Prof. Lauren R. Alpert
PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy Prof. Lauren R. Alpert Name: Date: Take Home Exam #1 Instructions Answer as many questions as you are able to. Please write your answers clearly in the blanks provided.
More informationArgument 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
More informationFinding Gaps in Sources
Finding Gaps in Sources Overall Use MAN analysis ask what is: M issing; what information is left out A skewed; what use of data is misrepresented or problematic N eglected; what point should have been
More informationIntroduction to Philosophy
Introduction to Philosophy Philosophy 110W Russell Marcus Hamilton College, Fall 2013 Class 1 - Introduction to Introduction to Philosophy My name is Russell. My office is 202 College Hill Road, Room 210.
More informationPHI 244. Environmental Ethics. Introduction. Argument Worksheet. Argument Worksheet. Welcome to PHI 244, Environmental Ethics. About Stephen.
Introduction PHI 244 Welcome to PHI 244, About Stephen Texts Course Requirements Syllabus Points of Interest Website http://seschmid.org, http://seschmid.org/teaching Email Policy 1 2 Argument Worksheet
More informationRichard L. W. Clarke, Notes REASONING
1 REASONING Reasoning is, broadly speaking, the cognitive process of establishing reasons to justify beliefs, conclusions, actions or feelings. It also refers, more specifically, to the act or process
More informationIn 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.
More informationThe Effect of Religiosity on Class Attendance. Abstract
Curt Raney Introduction to Data Analysis Spring 2000 Word : 1,157 The Effect of Religiosity on Class Attendance Abstract This paper reports the results of a survey of college students showing that religiosity
More informationPersuasive Argument Relies heavily on appeals to emotion, to the subconscious, even to bias and prejudice. Characterized by figurative language,
Persuasive Argument Relies heavily on appeals to emotion, to the subconscious, even to bias and prejudice. Characterized by figurative language, rhythmic patterns of speech, etc. Logical Argument Appeals
More informationJanuary Parish Life Survey. Saint Paul Parish Macomb, Illinois
January 2018 Parish Life Survey Saint Paul Parish Macomb, Illinois Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate Georgetown University Washington, DC Parish Life Survey Saint Paul Parish Macomb, Illinois
More informationThe Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments)
The Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments) Adapted from: An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments: Learn the lost art of making sense by Ali Almossawi *Not, by any stretch of the imagination,
More informationModule 02 Lecture - 10 Inferential Statistics Single Sample Tests
Introduction to Data Analytics Prof. Nandan Sudarsanam and Prof. B. Ravindran Department of Management Studies and Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
More informationAsking 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
More informationAICE 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
More informationMPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic
MPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic Making and Refuting Arguments Steps of an Argument You make a claim The conclusion of your
More informationOn the Relationship between Religiosity and Ideology
Curt Raney Introduction to Data Analysis Spring 1997 Word Count: 1,583 On the Relationship between Religiosity and Ideology Abstract This paper reports the results of a survey of students at a small college
More information7. Some recent rulings of the Supreme Court were politically motivated decisions that flouted the entire history of U.S. legal practice.
M05_COPI1396_13_SE_C05.QXD 10/12/07 9:00 PM Page 193 5.5 The Traditional Square of Opposition 193 EXERCISES Name the quality and quantity of each of the following propositions, and state whether their
More informationInductive Logic. Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.
Inductive Logic Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence. An inductive leap is the intellectual movement from limited facts to a general conviction. The reliability
More information1. 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
More informationDiscussion Notes for Bayesian Reasoning
Discussion Notes for Bayesian Reasoning Ivan Phillips - http://www.meetup.com/the-chicago-philosophy-meetup/events/163873962/ Bayes Theorem tells us how we ought to update our beliefs in a set of predefined
More informationIntroductory Statistics Day 25. Paired Means Test
Introductory Statistics Day 25 Paired Means Test 4.4 Paired Tests Find the data set textbooks.xlsx on the Moodle page. This data set is from OpenIntro Stats. In this data set we have 73 textbooks that
More informationINTRODUCTION TO HYPOTHESIS TESTING. Unit 4A - Statistical Inference Part 1
1 INTRODUCTION TO HYPOTHESIS TESTING Unit 4A - Statistical Inference Part 1 Now we will begin our discussion of hypothesis testing. This is a complex topic which we will be working with for the rest of
More informationPHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy
PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy Session 3 September 9 th, 2015 All About Arguments (Part II) 1 A common theme linking many fallacies is that they make unwarranted assumptions. An assumption is a claim
More informationMeasuring religious intolerance across Indonesian provinces
Measuring religious intolerance across Indonesian provinces How do Indonesian provinces vary in the levels of religious tolerance among their Muslim populations? Which province is the most tolerant and
More informationThe World Wide Web and the U.S. Political News Market: Online Appendices
The World Wide Web and the U.S. Political News Market: Online Appendices Online Appendix OA. Political Identity of Viewers Several times in the paper we treat as the left- most leaning TV station. Posner
More informationIntroduction to Statistical Hypothesis Testing Prof. Arun K Tangirala Department of Chemical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
Introduction to Statistical Hypothesis Testing Prof. Arun K Tangirala Department of Chemical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Lecture 09 Basics of Hypothesis Testing Hello friends, welcome
More informationContent Area Variations of Academic Language
Academic Expressions for Interpreting in Language Arts 1. It really means because 2. The is a metaphor for 3. It wasn t literal; that s the author s way of describing how 4. The author was trying to teach
More informationStudy Guides. Chapter 1 - Basic Training
Study Guides Chapter 1 - Basic Training Argument: A group of propositions is an argument when one or more of the propositions in the group is/are used to give evidence (or if you like, reasons, or grounds)
More informationstage 2 Logic & Knowledge
stage 2 Logic & Knowledge What logic puts in order is the way we reason out. Logic makes explicit the rules of reasoning. Logical Inference Determining if an argument is valid or not is important, but
More information1. 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.
More informationQuestions for Critically Reading an Argument
ARGUMENT Questions for Critically Reading an Argument What claims does the writer make? What kinds and quality of evidence does the writer provide to support the claim? What assumptions underlie the argument,
More informationFACTS About Non-Seminary-Trained Pastors Marjorie H. Royle, Ph.D. Clay Pots Research April, 2011
FACTS About Non-Seminary-Trained Pastors Marjorie H. Royle, Ph.D. Clay Pots Research April, 2011 This report is one of a series summarizing the findings of two major interdenominational and interfaith
More informationVideo: 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
More informationFallacies 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
More informationIn Our Own Words 2000 Research Study
The Death Penalty and Selected Factors from the In Our Own Words 2000 Research Study Prepared on July 25 th, 2001 DEATH PENALTY AND SELECTED FACTORS 2 WHAT BRINGS US TOGETHER: A PRESENTATION OF THE IOOW
More informationWhat is an argument? PHIL 110. Is this an argument? Is this an argument? What about this? And what about this?
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.
More informationThe Scripture Engagement of Students at Christian Colleges
The 2013 Christian Life Survey The Scripture Engagement of Students at Christian Colleges The Center for Scripture Engagement at Taylor University HTTP://TUCSE.Taylor.Edu In 2013, the Center for Scripture
More informationSocial Perception Survey. Do people make prejudices based on appearance/stereotypes? We used photos as a bias to test this.
SOCIAL PERCEPTIONS Social Perception Survey Do people make prejudices based on appearance/stereotypes? We used photos as a bias to test this. Randomization Using the master schedule, our group immediately
More informationFallacies. Definition: The premises of an argument do support a particular conclusion but not the conclusion that the arguer actually draws.
Fallacies 1. Hasty generalization Definition: Making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate (usually because it is atypical or too small). Stereotypes about
More informationLOGICAL 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
More informationPHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES
PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES Philosophy SECTION I: Program objectives and outcomes Philosophy Educational Objectives: The objectives of programs in philosophy are to: 1. develop in majors the ability
More informationLogic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic
Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic Standardizing and Diagramming In Reason and the Balance we have taken the approach of using a simple outline to standardize short arguments,
More informationThis report is organized in four sections. The first section discusses the sample design. The next
2 This report is organized in four sections. The first section discusses the sample design. The next section describes data collection and fielding. The final two sections address weighting procedures
More informationIntroduction to Inference
Introduction to Inference Confidence Intervals for Proportions 1 On the one hand, we can make a general claim with 100% confidence, but it usually isn t very useful; on the other hand, we can also make
More information3. Good arguments 3.1 A historical example
3. Good arguments 3.1 A historical example An important example of excellent reasoning can be found in the case of the medical advances of the Nineteenth Century physician, Ignaz Semmelweis. Semmelweis
More informationSurvey Report New Hope Church: Attitudes and Opinions of the People in the Pews
Survey Report New Hope Church: Attitudes and Opinions of the People in the Pews By Monte Sahlin May 2007 Introduction A survey of attenders at New Hope Church was conducted early in 2007 at the request
More informationPLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ
PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ Critical Thinking: Quiz 4 Chapter Three: Argument Evaluation Section I. Indicate whether the following claims (1-10) are either true (A) or false (B). 1. If an arguer precedes
More informationUnit. 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
More information6.041SC Probabilistic Systems Analysis and Applied Probability, Fall 2013 Transcript Lecture 21
6.041SC Probabilistic Systems Analysis and Applied Probability, Fall 2013 Transcript Lecture 21 The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare
More informationThis 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:
More informationScientific Arguments
Scientific Arguments Berkeley: Understanding Science project Brian DeMarco, Lance Cooper, Celia Elliott, Alan Nathan A scientific argument is not a history of what you did and statement of your conclusion.
More informationSelections 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
More informationChapter Five. Persuasive Writing
Chapter Five Persuasive Writing When I'm getting ready to reason with a man, I spend one-third of my time thinking about myself and what I am going to say and two-thirds thinking about him and what he
More informationCSC290 Communication Skills for Computer Scientists
CSC290 Communication Skills for Computer Scientists Lisa Zhang Lecture 2; Sep 17, 2018 Announcements Blog post #1 due Sunday 8:59pm Submit a link to your blog post on MarkUs (should be operational next
More informationARE JEWS MORE POLARISED IN THEIR SOCIAL ATTITUDES THAN NON-JEWS? EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE 1995 JPR STUDY
Research note ARE JEWS MORE POLARISED IN THEIR SOCIAL ATTITUDES THAN NON-JEWS? EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE 1995 JPR STUDY Stephen H Miller Numerous studies have reported differences between the attitudes
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 1. Background Material for the Exercise on Validity
Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics Critical Thinking Lecture 1 Background Material for the Exercise on Validity Reasons, Arguments, and the Concept of Validity 1. The Concept of Validity Consider
More informationThe Roman empire ended, the Mongol empire ended, the Persian empire ended, the British empire ended, all empires end, and none lasts forever.
BASIC ARGUMENTATION Alfred Snider, University of Vermont World Schools Debate Academy, Slovenia, 2015 Induction, deduction, causation, fallacies INDUCTION Definition: studying a sufficient number of analogous
More informationA Layperson s Guide to Hypothesis Testing By Michael Reames and Gabriel Kemeny ProcessGPS
A Layperson s Guide to Hypothesis Testing By Michael Reames and Gabriel Kemeny ProcessGPS In a recent Black Belt Class, the partners of ProcessGPS had a lively discussion about the topic of hypothesis
More informationStudying Religion-Associated Variations in Physicians Clinical Decisions: Theoretical Rationale and Methodological Roadmap
Studying Religion-Associated Variations in Physicians Clinical Decisions: Theoretical Rationale and Methodological Roadmap Farr A. Curlin, MD Kenneth A. Rasinski, PhD Department of Medicine The University
More informationChapter Notes (Final Exam) On April, 26, 2012
Chapter Notes (Final Exam) On April, 26, 2012 Part 3: Arguments Chapter 8: Inductive Reasoning (270-324) -Deductive argument is intended to provide logically conclusive support for its conclusion; such
More information3.2: 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
More informationReligious Beliefs of Higher Secondary School Teachers in Pathanamthitta District of Kerala State
IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 22, Issue 11, Ver. 10 (November. 2017) PP 38-42 e-issn: 2279-0837, p-issn: 2279-0845. www.iosrjournals.org Religious Beliefs of Higher Secondary
More informationChapter 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
More informationFallacies in logic. Hasty Generalization. Post Hoc (Faulty cause) Slippery Slope
Fallacies in logic Hasty Generalization Definition: Making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate (usually because it is atypical or just too small). Stereotypes
More informationNUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD FOR RELEASE DECEMBER 30, 2013
NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD FOR RELEASE DECEMBER 30, 2013 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THIS REPORT: Alan Cooperman, Director of Religion Research Cary Funk, Senior Researcher Erin O Connell,
More informationJEWISH EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: TRENDS AND VARIATIONS AMONG TODAY S JEWISH ADULTS
JEWISH EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: TRENDS AND VARIATIONS AMONG TODAY S JEWISH ADULTS Steven M. Cohen The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Senior Research Consultant, UJC United Jewish Communities Report Series
More informationPastor-teacher Don Hargrove Faith Bible Church September 8, 2011
Pastor-teacher Don Hargrove Faith Bible Church http://www.fbcweb.org/doctrines.html September 8, 2011 Building Mental Muscle & Growing the Mind through Logic Exercises: Lesson 4a The Three Acts of the
More informationNigerian University Students Attitudes toward Pentecostalism: Pilot Study Report NPCRC Technical Report #N1102
Nigerian University Students Attitudes toward Pentecostalism: Pilot Study Report NPCRC Technical Report #N1102 Dr. K. A. Korb and S. K Kumswa 30 April 2011 1 Executive Summary The overall purpose of this
More informationRECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, July, 2014, How Americans Feel About Religious Groups
NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD FOR RELEASE JULY 16, 2014 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THIS REPORT: Alan Cooperman, Director of Religion Research Greg Smith, Associate Director, Research Besheer
More informationCausation and Free Will
Causation and Free Will T L Hurst Revised: 17th August 2011 Abstract This paper looks at the main philosophic positions on free will. It suggests that the arguments for causal determinism being compatible
More informationL4: Reasoning. Dani Navarro
L4: Reasoning Dani Navarro Deductive reasoning Inductive reasoning Informal reasoning WE talk of man* being the rational animal; and the traditional intellectualist philosophy has always made a great point
More informationLogic: 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
More informationPHLA10 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
More informationPredictability, Causation, and Free Will
Predictability, Causation, and Free Will Luke Misenheimer (University of California Berkeley) August 18, 2008 The philosophical debate between compatibilists and incompatibilists about free will and determinism
More informationMore See Too Much Religious Talk by Politicians
March 21, 2012 Santorum Voters Disagree More See Too Much Religious Talk by Politicians FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Kohut President, Pew Research Center Carroll Doherty, Michael Dimock Associate
More informationUnit 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,
More informationVideo Reaction. Opening Activity. Journal #16
Justification / explanation Interpretation / inference Methodologies / paradigms Verification / truth / certainty Argument / evaluation Evidence / data / facts / support / proof Limitations / uncertainties
More informationMay Parish Life Survey. St. Mary of the Knobs Floyds Knobs, Indiana
May 2013 Parish Life Survey St. Mary of the Knobs Floyds Knobs, Indiana Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate Georgetown University Washington, DC Parish Life Survey St. Mary of the Knobs Floyds
More information1 Scientific Reasoning
1 Scientific Reasoning Scientific reasoning is the foundation supporting the entire structure of logic underpinning scientific research. It is impossible to explore the entire process, in any detail, because
More informationEthos, Logos, Pathos: Three Ways to Persuade
Ethos, Logos, Pathos: Three Ways to Persuade by Dr. John R. Edlund, Cal Poly Pomona Over 2,000 years ago the Greek philosopher Aristotle argued that there were three basic ways to persuade an audience
More informationStructuring and Analyzing Argument: Toulmin and Rogerian Models. English 106
Structuring and Analyzing Argument: Toulmin and Rogerian Models English 106 The Toulmin Model Developed by British philosopher Stephen Toulmin in the 1950 s Emphasizes that logic often based on probability
More informationConvincing People You re Right, With Style. actuality it is not. Writing in this form is simply making use of both critical thought, and
Everett Butler Hanson Advanced Comp. January, 4, 2018 Convincing People You re Right, With Style Abstract The idea of philosophical writing may seem high minded and intimidating at first, but in actuality
More information