Chapter 5 cont ( unacceptable premises)

Question 1

whats The Fallacy of Begging the Question (Circular Reasoning)?

Answer 1

• involves Unacceptable Premise
• Attempting to prove a conclusion by using that same conclusion as a premise. (Sometimes the conclusion is worded differently when it is used as a premise, and sometimes it is implicit.)

example:
“God exists. We know that God exists because the Bible says so, and we know that God wrote the Bible”

Ask yourself: would I accept the premise if I didn’t already accept the conclusion?

Note: the expression “begging the question” is used in a technical way here, and that its technical meaning differs from the colloquial meaning.

Question 2

whats The Fallacy of Begging the Question also known as

Answer 2

Circular Reasoning

Question 3

whats the The fallacy of false dichotomy?

Answer 3

• involves Unacceptable Premise

The fallacy of false dichotomy occurs when the premise(s) claim or assume that a choice between two alternatives is exhaustive or exclusive or both, when the choice is not.
“You’re either for us or you’re against us”
“You’re either a teacher, or else you’re a student”
“I’m against giving aid to countries in which people are starving. We will never be able to eradicate hunger completely, so it’s a waste of time even trying.”(implicit: either we eradicate hunger altogether or we’re just wasting our time)
“Students must choose between getting good grades and having fun. Tammy has decided she wants to have fun, so I guess she’s not going to get good grades.”

Question 4

whats are the alternatives in the Fallacy of False Dilemma (False Dichotomy)?

Answer 4

Alternatives are..
1) exhaustive or non-exhaustive
2) exclusive or non-exclusive

examples:
a) Exhaustive and exclusive: pregnant or not pregnant

b) Exclusive and non-exhaustive: you’ll either get an A or a C

c) Exhaustive and non-exclusive: a list of all Ryerson degrees

d) Non-exhaustive and non-exclusive: sandwich or soup for lunch

Question 5

the Fallacy of False Dilemma is aslo knwon as

Answer 5

False Dichotomy

Question 6

To test whether an alternative is exhaustive, ask:

Answer 6

“Are these all the possible options?”

Question 7

To test whether an alternative is exclusive, ask:

Answer 7

Do these options rule each other out?

Question 8

whats The Slippery Slope Fallacy

Answer 8

• involves Unacceptable Premise
  This occurs when an argument claims or assumes that taking a particular step will inevitably lead to a further, undesirable step or steps.

Arguments that commit this fallacy typically have this form “Doing A will lead to B, which will lead to C, which will certainly result in terrible consequence D. So we should not do A”

Question 9

what fallacy makes use of the Hypothetical Syllogism (If A, then B. If B, then C. Therefore, if A then C.) which is valid

Answer 9

The Slippery Slope Fallacy, Such arguments are fallacies when it is unlikely that one or more of the conditionals is true.

example:“If we allow voluntary, physician-assisted suicide, then tomorrow we’ll have non-voluntary assisted suicide on unconscious patients. Then we’ll have involuntary assisted-suicide on unwilling patients. Soon, no hospital will be safe from ‘helpful’ doctors!”

Question 10

whats The Fallacy of Hasty Generalization?

Answer 10

• involves Unacceptable Premise

When an argument concludes something about a group or set on the basis of an inadequate sample size.

“All the cafeteria food is terrible. I had a burger there once, and it made me queasy.”

“I met these two guys on a plane, and they said they were from Edmonton. They were total druggies. Almost everyone in that city must be on drugs.”

“Children should never be spanked. I’ve talked to three parents recently, and they all agree that spanking is quite harmful to a child’s self-esteem.”

Question 11

whats The Fallacy of Faulty Analogy?

Answer 11

• involves Unacceptable Premise

We often reason by analogy: by comparing one thing to another.
Specifically: we conclude something about the target by comparing it to the analogue.

When we reason by analogy, the analogue must be
(a) relevantly-similar; and
(b) sufficiently-similar to the target.

1. Suzie did well in SSH105 last year.
   2.Her sister, Jane, is similar to Suzie: she is bright (RELEVANT) and works hard (RELEVANT).
   Therefore, probably,
   Jane will do well in SSH105. (from 1,2)

1.Suzie did well in SSH105 last year.
2.Her sister, Jane, is similar to Suzie: she is tall (NOT RELEVANT) and is vegan (NOT RELEVANT).
Therefore, probably,
Jane will do well in SSH105. (from 1,2)

An argument commits the fallacy of faulty analogy when the analogue fails to be both relevantly-similar and sufficiently-similar to the target.

Question 12

When we reason by analogy, the analogue must be

Answer 12

(a) relevantly-similar; and
(b) sufficiently-similar to the target.

Question 13

An argument commits the fallacy of faulty analogy when

Answer 13

the analogue fails to be both relevantly-similar and sufficiently-similar to the target.

Question 14

give an example of similarities are not sufficient to support the conclusion.

Answer 14

(1) Bill is an investment banker, drives a Lexus, is overweight, and votes Conservative.
(2) John is also an investment banker, drives a Lexus, and is overweight.
(3) So John probably votes Conservative as well.

(1) Dogs are warm blooded, nurse their young, and give birth to puppies.
(2) Humans are also warm blooded and nurse their young.
(3) So probably humans give birth to puppies.