Critical Thinking ch2 Flashcards
hoe heet het als iemand ambiguity gebruikt om de content of een argument te confusen
fallacy of equivocation
what is it called when someone rhetorically tries to obscure a persuader’s true point
the rhetorical ploy of trading on an equivocation
ambiguity=
wanneer er meer dan een mogelijke manier is om een zin te interpreteren
2 types of ambiguity
- lexical ambiguity
- syntactic ambiguity
lexical ambiguity=
when a word has more than one meaning.
hoe heten de woorden bij lexical ambiguity waar de expression ook bij hoort
extension van een term
all square things are square, dit gaat dus helemaal door
voorbeeld lexical ambiguity
ball, curious
homonyms=
Words that sound the
same but have different meanings and often different spellings are called homonyms.
mussel/muscle
syntactic ambiguity =
wanneer de arrangements of words in a sentence zo is dat het op meerdere manieren geinterpreteerd kan worden
The president has cancelled a trip to Canada to play golf.
welke vorm van ambiguity is moeilijker te interpreteren
syntactic vaak moeilijker dan lexical
vague=
the meaning of a word or expression is vague if it is indefinite or if it is uncertain what is conveyed by the word in the context under consideration.
dus verschil vagueness en ambiguity
bij ambiguity weet je wel de duidelijke definitie van een woord, maar niet welke definitie hierbij hoort.
bij vagueness is er gewoon geen duidelijke definitie (weapons of mass destruction???)
wat voor soort woorden worden vaak in rhetorical power gebruikt, en zijn vague:
‘rights’, ‘liberal’, ‘harassment’, ‘racism’, ‘sexism
hyperbole=
the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.
wat hebben alle ordinary words?
een range of things to which it applies: extension
yellow, square.
primary connotation =
the literal meaning of a word, the definition
schaap
secondary connotation =
what we associate with the definition
wol, gras, veld, herder etc
op welke connotation baseren we metaforen
on the basis of secondary connotations. vaak is de primaire connotation ook niet waar (iemand een varken noemen: diegene is niet letterlijk een varken)
wat is een eis voor een primary connotation
somehing falls within this extension of a term only if all the conditions are met.
wat is een eis voor secondary connotation
Things that fall under the term will generally exhibit these characteristics, but not always. there can be things that falls under the term but lack a characteristic included under the secondary connotation.
bv een kaal schaap is nog steeds een schaap. of een schaap dat niet in de wei staat
wanneer kan er verschil zitten tussen primary en secondary connotation
It is difficult to pin down the precise meaning of a word such as ‘left-wing’ because, on the one hand, its primary connotation is very difficult to pin down and, on the other, its secondary connotation is so rich.
verschil rhetorical question en declarative sentence
Rhetorical questions take the form of a question but indirectly assert a proposition, whereas a declarative sentence directly asserts a proposition.
uitleg rhetorical question
Speakers and writers often use rhetorical questions when they’re making a point they assume to be obvious, so the answer to the question ‘goes without saying’. However, in many cases the point is neither obvious nor universally agreed. Rhetorical questions obfuscate speakers’ and writers’ intended meanings because they make it more difficult to interpret whether or not a speaker/writer really does support a given claim.
“what boy did not do this at 14?”
irony=
This takes the form of language that, taken literally, would convey the opposite of what they wish to convey, or something otherwise very different from it.
twerken en dan zeggen: oh very tasteful
implicitly relative sentence =
they make a comparison with
some group of things, but that comparison is not explicitly mentioned.
- She earns an above-average salary.
- It is the best of its kind.
- Great Uncle Eddie is a fast runner.
- Taxes are high.
- The rent on our house is low.
- I have a very, very large brain.
Quantifiers=
quantifiers are words and phrases that tell us how many/much of something there are/is, or how often something happens.
- All Maseratis drive too fast.
- Politicians are often self-serving.
- Few lawyers support the proposed judicial reforms.
- Nearly all the students passed the course.
- She likes hardly any of her fellow students
wat is het probleem met quantifiers
- niet vaak met sufficient precision, daardoor is de proposition niet duidelijk en open to misinterpretation and rhetorical abuse.
- sommige quantifiers zijn zelf vague (bv sommige: whoeveel zijn dat er???)
- soms geven mensen geen quantifiers, terwijl ze dat wel bedoelen (professoren geven studenten geen kans om te klagen -> bedoelen hiermee de meeste professoren)
counterexamples =
Exceptions that we use to challenge the truth of a generalising claim
counterexample van:
alle studenten werken hard
point out various students we know who study very little and spend the majority of their time gaming
generalisations =
‘categorical’ statements involving quantifiers such as ‘all’, ‘every’,
‘always’, ‘no’, ‘never’ and so on, but also ‘most’, ‘usually’ and the like.
hard generalisations=
gaat over iedereen, geen exeptions
soft generalisations
laat zien dat we trends zien in bepaalde dingen, tends to be true
woorden bij soft generalisations
normally, typically, generally, usually, on average, for the most part.
woorden bij hard generalisations
‘all’, ‘every’, ‘no’, ‘always’, ‘never’
If someone makes a claim that is intended as a hard generalisation and we can find a counterexample to it, then we have refuted their claim. but then the soft generalisation is true.
oke
wat is het probleem van soft generalisations
- people may take it as a hard generalisation
- it might wrongly be taken as asserting something about the innate or
genetic qualities of someone/something else
rethorical force =
the rhetorical aspect of a sentence’s meaning
it is the emotive or otherwise suggestive
window dressing surrounding the proposition, and it may be used to persuade us
dus nog een keer wat is een rhetorische vraag, en wat is rhetoric
retorische vraag=vraag waar je geen echt antwoord op wil
rhetoric = the art of speaking or writing to persuade people (the magic of words)
implicature =
Implicature is meaning that is not stated but which one can reasonably take to be
intended given the context in which the sentence is written or uttered.
The sentence ‘That young man left early’
expresses the same proposition as the rhetorically charged ‘That lazy so-and-so
bunked off early’. But, while the former merely expresses a fact about when a
person left, the second, by its inclusion of ‘lazy’ and use of the ‘so-and-so’ and
‘bunked off’ might function not only to inform us of a fact, but also to manipulate our sympathies concerning the person in question.
‘That young man left early’
vs ‘That lazy so-and-so bunked off early’.
zelfde proposition, maar de tweede is met rhetorical force
oke
waar heeft implicature heel veel mee te maken
met de context
voorbeeld implicature
Suppose, for example, that a student’s parent asks one of her lecturers how she is progressing in her studies and he replies, ‘Well, she hasn’t been thrown out for missing classes.’ The lecturer doesn’t actually state ‘She’s not doing very well’, but the implicature is that she’s not.
It is also a way of communicating something without incurring the full-
responsibility of having explicitly said it
= implicature statement
de receiver kan een implicature statement alleen begrijpen als ze fully aware zijn van de relevante context
oke
wat is een definitie of wat heeft een definitie
necessary and sufficient conditions for
counting something as an instance of X (X functions here as a placeholder; it stands for any object or feature, such as an argument or a house). The necessary conditions for being X are the conditions that a thing must satisfy if it is to count as an X. The sufficient conditions for being an X are the conditions such that if something meets them, it is enough for it to count as an X
voorbeeld van definitie van een ewe
A ewe must be female and a sheep, and its being female and a sheep is enough to make it a ewe. Being female is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being a ewe. And although it may have wool, it may say ‘baah’ and it may eat grass, these are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions of its being a ewe. (Our earlier discussion of primary and secondary connotation provides insight into the role of these nonessential features in determining the meanings of terms.) Contrariwise, being a ewe is a sufficient condition for being a sheep, but it isn’t a necessary condition for being sheep; a ram is also a sheep (a male sheep)
rhetorical ploys & fallacies=
when people tend to persuade us in ways that appear to provide motivation for doing/believing something, but do not give us good reasons to do or believe that thing
verschil rhetorical ploys en fallacies
rhetorical ploys = non argumentative (they dont actually give reasons)
fallacies = argumentative (they give reasons, but they arent good)
een aantal soorten rethorical ploys
novelty, popularity, compassion, pity, guilt, fear, cuteness, sexiness,
hipness, coolness, wealth, power, ridicule
appeal to novelty =
Often this ploy appeals to our desire not to miss out on a new trend, or arouses our fear of appearing outdated in our tastes
(vote for change!)
“new”
“latest”
appeal to popularity=
this ploy appeals to our desire to run with the crowd, not to appear different from the norm and not to miss out on what others have.
It is commonly used to persuade us to buy things, but also occurs frequently as a means to persuade us to adopt a belief or to follow a certain course of action.
“most downloaded, most trusted”
voorbeeld rhetorical appeal to popularity
P1) The most downloaded music-streaming app must be the best app for
steaming music.
P2) The most downloaded music-steaming app is Splatifi.
C1) Splatifi is the best app for steaming music.
wel valid, maar niet sound: eerste premises slaat nergens op.
appeal to compassion, pity or guilt
This common rhetorical ploy operates by attempting to move us to do something
purely by evoking a feeling of compassion towards the recipients of the suggested act or belief, or a feeling of guilt about their plight. The feeling alone does not provide a good reason for us to perform the act in question.
dus het gevoel alleen is niet genoeg. maar het kan er wel voor zorgen dat we naar argumenten zoeken die wel goed zijn.
P1) A donation to the Worldwide Fund for Children would probably help to
alleviate the suffering of children from extreme hunger.
P2) I should try to alleviate extreme suffering where it’s possible for me to do so.
P3) It is possible for me to make a donation to the WWFC.
C) Probably, I should make a donation to the WWFC
wat is dit argument?
inductively forceful. kan ook zeggen dat het argument sound is.
Appeal to cuteness=
This rhetorical technique supplements its words with images of children, animals
or animated characters to deliver a message
appeal to sexiness
To those who would desire the sexy person depicted in the advertisement, the product is made to seem desirable by its association with the sexy person. But it is also made to seem desirable to those who would like to think of themselves as sexy in the way that the sexy person is.
Appeal to fear (also known as scare tactics) vs genuine warnings
In instances of the appeal, there is no warranted connection between the fear elicited and taking the suggested course of action or accepting the claim, whereas in the case of a warning, we are given a good reason to act.
Appeal to ridicule
This ploy occurs when a speaker/writer attacks their opponent’s position or claim
by casting it in a light that will make it seem ridiculous to their audience.
voorbeeld appeal to ridicule
‘This is political correctness gone mad! If we deny these positions to everyone who ever had a little too much to drink in college, or got a bit loud and wild once in a while, almost everyone in the top echelons of business, the media, the judiciary and politics would be out of a job!’ The scrutiny of allegations of serious behaviour is made to look ridiculous by making it seem as though it is on a par with, and no worse than, much more common and less serious bad behaviour that can be common among students and other young people
the direct attack and hard sell=
simple, slogans en hele korte zinnen zonder uitleg
The direct attack involves the bold assertion of a position or
command. The hard sell is the direct attack repeated.
The hard sell is simply the direct attack repeated persistently. Children
are notably effective with it. The persuader just keeps it up until the subject of their attack gives in and does as they want, the persuader thereby having influenced their target by verbal means without giving reasons for doing as they command.
say no to higher tuition fees
scare quotes=
quotation marks placed round a word or phrase to draw attention to an unusual or arguably inaccurate use.
“alysum seekers”
“global warming”
The speaker/writer takes key words in terms of which their opponent expresses their views and attempts to discredit those views by making them appear ridiculous or suspicious through the use of scare quotes
dus ze attacken de legitimacy of the justification provided for those views
trading on an equivocation=
This ploy deliberately exploits the ambiguity, and in some cases the vagueness, of a word or phrase in the given context
Petrol consumption zero, the new Barolla and Trav4 diesels are here.
Mr Smith, who is believed to have links to terrorist organisations, was seen
boarding a flight at Heathrow Airport. (links to…? what do u mean????)
welke tactic wordt vaak in smear campaigns gebruikt
trading on an equivocation: This tactic of evoking guilt by association is frequently used by people conducting
smear campaigns – if someone’s alleged connection to some wrongdoing or wrongdoer is repeated often enough the association tends to be cemented in an
audience’s mind.
equivocation definitie
dubbelzinnigheid
trading on implicature=
This is the tactic of using a statement’s implicature to mislead the audience. Since the proposition implicated is not actually stated by the speaker, the speaker can hope to avoid responsibility for having misled the audience. This is
a common tactic in political discussion.
many questions aka leading question or complex question=
It is the tactic of posing a question that appears to seek an explanation for some proposition, p, thereby misleadingly implying that p is true.
voorbeeld trading on implicature
If the government increases income tax, it will be a further burden on working families.
maar… de politician knows that the government in question is not actually considering the tax increase
smokescreen=
changing the subject naar een ander (soms related, soms niet) probleem.
voorbeeld many questions=
ask if they would be more or less likely to vote for that candidate if they knew that he supported unlimited access to firearms.
terwijl dat misschien helemaal niet zo is.
voorbeeld probleem smokescreen
Consider, for instance, a company CEO
trying to defend a senior executive’s reputation after they have been involved in some kind of socially unacceptable behaviour. The events have come to light
because an employee has leaked a confidential internal report into the matter. In defending the person, the CEO responds by launching into a speech about how the leak constitutes a dreadful dereliction of duty and breach of trust.
whataboutism=
een drogreden waarmee iemand de beschuldiging van een misstand niet weerlegt, maar zijn of haar opponent er met een retorische vraag What about …? (Hoe zit het met …?) van beticht schuldig te zijn aan een andere ernstige misstand.
voorbeeld whataboutism
when a child is being told off and they try to distract attention onto a sibling or friend saying something like ‘What about her? She hasn’t tidied her room either!’
whataboutism may also occur in the form of…
a fallacy: tu quoque
(dus dan wel met redenen)
2 vormen van smokescreen
- whataboutism
- criticising the tone of someones contribution to a discussion (how they say something) “het gaat om je toon”
dit is dus allemaal smokescreen
buzzwords=
This is the technique of using fashionable or otherwise currently ‘hot’ words or phrases that are loaded with rhetorical power due to their rich secondary connotation.
“change” “left-wing”
jargon =
Jargon is an often impenetrable way of speaking or writing that uses words or
phrases that are likely to be unfamiliar to most of the audience, or which uses
familiar words in unfamiliar ways.
Jargon wields strong rhetorical
power. If you use jargon correctly then you appear to be ‘in the know’, one of the
in-crowd. So it functions to provide its users with a kind of exclusivity and
excludes those who don’t understand or know how to use the insiders’ language.
Jargon is also used to obscure the true meaning or implication of what’s being said.
acronyms=
Acronyms are series of initials used as though they are a word to provide an
abbreviation for a name or phrase. As with jargon, the rhetorical power of the use of acronyms lies in their ability to create insiders who are able to decode them and understand what they are being used to convey, and to exclude those who aren’t language and rhetoric ‘in the know’.
tegen coassistenten gaan praten over niertx en dbc
spin doctor =
a spokesperson employed to give a favourable interpretation of events to the media, especially on behalf of a political party.
banks are not simply ‘giving them money’; rather, they are ‘injecting liquidity’.
gaslighting=
Gas-lighting occurs when we use language rhetorically to cast doubt onto
someone’s claims by making the speaker or writer themselves seem and feel less
confident about their claim, usually a claim about something negative that has happened or is happening to them.
the gas-lighter manipulates
their victim into doubting their own memories and perceptions, to the extent that they might even doubt their own sanity
voorbeeld gaslighting
mark rutte die zegt dat hij ergens geen actieve herinnering aan heeft
nog een keer trading on an equivocation =
Trading on an equivocation occurs when someone knowingly makes an
ambiguous or vague statement that may be true when interpreted in one particular way, but when interpreted in another may be false, but also more favourable to the position being advanced or to the product being advertised
nog een keer smokescreen
Smokescreen occurs when one talks about some highly controversial, compelling or otherwise arresting issue or object in an effort to divert the audience momentarily from the issue under discussion. Whataboutism is a type of smokescreen. A successful smokescreen causes the audience to overlook the fact that the issue has not been addressed.
welke begrippen horen bij trading on an equivocation
lexical and syntactic ambiguity
My opponents will say that we have a moral duty to honour our United
Nations commitments and provide refugees with a safe haven. But I
say to you: look at all these people arriving here and then claiming state
benefits – they are sucking the taxpayer dry
=
smokescreen
Fatbusters – the most successful weight-loss programme on the market
today!
=
equivocation -> wat is most successful?
