1 / 11

Philosophy 1100

Philosophy 1100. Title: Critical Reasoning Instructor: Paul Dickey E-mail Address: pdickey2@mccneb.edu Website: http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/NCW/dickey.htm. Today: Submit Midterm Re-take & Discuss Return Second Editorial Analysis – You can do better than this!

gaitherp
Download Presentation

Philosophy 1100

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Philosophy 1100 Title: Critical Reasoning Instructor: Paul Dickey E-mail Address: pdickey2@mccneb.edu Website:http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/NCW/dickey.htm Today: Submit Midterm Re-take & Discuss Return Second Editorial Analysis – You can do better than this! Editorial Essay Workshop Discussion on Chapters Seven & Eight Next Week: Redo analysis on assigned article. Read Chapter 9, pp. 243- 251, 255-270. pp.272-274 Exercise 9-2. 1

  2. “A pupil from whom nothing is ever demanded which he cannot do, never does all he can.” It is, no doubt, a very laudable effort, in modern teaching, to render as much as possible of what the young are required to learn, easy and interesting to them.  But when this principle is pushed to the length of not requiring them, to learn anything but what has been made easy and interesting, one of the chief objectives of education is sacrificed.”                J. S. Mill, Autobiography

  3. Chapters Six & Seven: Logical Fallacies Presenters: Estelle: “Argumentum Ad Hominem” Cindy: The Straw Man / False Dilemma Rachael: Misplacing Burden of Proof / Begging the Question Ari: Appeal to Emotion James: Irrelevant Conclusions / Slippery Slope Michele: Generalizations Maria: Weak Analogy Instructor: Fallacious Appeals to Authority, Popularity, Cause & Effect; Untestable Explanations In your presentation, you must define your fallacy type, give examples, and distinguish it from other logical fallacies that are similar. I encourage you to use powerpoint slides in your presentation if possible, but it is not necessary.

  4. Chapter Seven: Induction Fallacies 4

  5. Generalizations • Inductive generalization Fallacies occur when too little support is given to make the claim reasonable. Various ways this is done is: 1. Hasty Generalization, or Arguing from an insufficient number of cases, e.g. The argument from anecdote. . 2. Generalizing from Exceptional Cases, e.g. The Fallacy of Biased Sample or the Self- selection Fallacy • 3. Accident. Assuming a general principle has to apply to every given circumstance. 5

  6. The Slippery Slope • The Slippery Slope Fallacy asserts that we can’t let one thing happen because it could lead to something else where there is no argument or a weak argument that the first action does in fact lead to the second. • e.g. Making people register hand guns is just the first step to making guns illegal. • e.g. Marijuana use should be illegal because it can lead to harder drugs. Important Video Want more advanced stuff on topic? Click here 6

  7. Fallacious Appeals / Logical Error • The “argument” from popularity suggests that if everyone or a majority “knows” or believes something, it must be true. Two variations of this are: • The “argument” from common practice defends a position on the basis that it is common. • The “argument” from tradition defends a position on the basis that has always been done that way. • The “argument” from authority suggests a claim is more likely to be true because some “expert” believes it. 7

  8. Fallacies Related to Cause and Effect 1) Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc is the fallacy that tries to trick us into believing an Event A caused an Event B simply because A preceded B in time. 2) Overlooking the Possibility of Coincidence. An example: Last week there must have been a terrorist attack last week when the Stock Market, United Airlines and the Wall Street Journal had “technical glitches” at the same time. 8

  9. Fallacies Related to Cause and Effect 3) Overlooking a Common Cause is the fallacy that tries to trick us into believing an Event B caused an Event C when another Event A could have been the cause of both. 4) Overlooking the Possibility of Reversed Causationis the fallacy that tries to trick us into assuming Event B caused an Event C when actually Event C could have caused Event B. 5) Argument by Anecdote is the fallacy that tries to trick us to believe a general claim by telling us a story. 9

  10. Untestable Explanations / Rhetorical Explanations • A rhetoric explanation is similarly deceptive and attempts to trash a person or idea under a mask or pretense of giving an explanation. • The War in Vietnam was lost because the American people lost their nerve.” • Students who drop my classes do so because they are idiots. • Liberals who criticize the U.S. Army’s actions in Iraq do so only because they are disloyal to their country. 10

  11. Chapter Eight: Formal Fallacies & Fallacies of Language Presenters: Estelle: Affirming the Consequent / Denying the Antecedent James: The Undistributed Middle Michele: Equivocation/Amphiboly & Composition/Division Cindy: Arguments/Explanations/Excuses Rachael: Contraries/Contradictories Ari: Flip-flopping & Gambler’s Fallacy Maria: Prior Probabilities / False Positives In your presentation, you must define your fallacy type, give examples, and distinguish it from other logical fallacies that are similar. I encourage you to use power point slides in your presentation if possible, but it is not necessary.

More Related