EVIDENCE + FALLACIES

Question 1

Ch 5: EVIDENCE

Answer 1

● Whenever we make a claim or state an argument, our premises act as supports to our conclusion

● Whenever you make a claim, the burden of proof lies with you to support that claim

● You must provide evidence to try to convince somebody why it is you believe something to be true

● The stronger the claim, the greater the burden of proof, the more convincing the evidence is going to have to be

● Varying types of evidence can be supplied, and criteria are used to measure the effectiveness of those types of evidence

Question 2

4 types of evidence

Answer 2

Anecdotal
Legal
Intuitive
Scientific

Question 3

Anecdotal evidence

Answer 3

Based on personal experience which often involves cause and effect relationships

Leads to improper generalizations (how racism and xenophobia begins)

Ex. “I saw Bigfoot” rest of have not
“Vaccinations give your kids Autism”

Possible to have single anecdotal experience and learn from it to make proper generalizations : “once bitten twice shy”
Ex. Child learning to not touch hot items

*it can lead to stronger forms of evidence (e.g. scientific evidence) b/c often begins as correlation betw 2 events which can be further investigated to determine if causality is present

Question 4

Legal evidence

Answer 4

In testimonials, witnesses in court of law swear under oath that info providing is true

‘Expert’ witnesses brought in to support either prosecution or defense

Lawyers try to demonstrate why testimonials for their side = valuable evidence, while testimonials from the other side should not

*Basis of legal testimony rests on the assumption that a person providing info/evidence has agreed to swear an oath (he or she is providing is “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”)

Question 5

Intuitive evidence

Answer 5

“Hunches”

Come from personal feelings about specific situations triggered by cues or behavioural patterns eliciting emotional responses in us

Ex.
“I didn’t walk down that dark alley because I felt as though it might be dangerous”
“I didn’t purchase the car from that salesman even though it seemed like a great buy because there was something suspicious about him.”

Question 6

Problems with Intuition

Answer 6

Sometimes right, but often wrong

No way to personally regulate feelings

You intuitively “feel” might be opp of what I’m intuitively feeling
Who is right?

• intuitive evidence is the least justifiable because of its very nature; we cannot measure hunches

Ex. Berry James Marshall proved that H. Pylori causes ulcers by consuming them

• stress was assumed to be cause of ulcer ; cannot measure stress

Question 7

Scientific evidence

Answer 7

Includes claims involving our understanding of the natural world that require we present physical, empirical evidence to show on right track in terms of understanding natural properties and mechanisms

As we saw in chapter 1, Induction (inductive reasoning) as a form of reasoning, is the hallmark of scientific investigation

We look at some behavior in the world, observe that it repeatedly occurs the same way under the same circumstances, and then conclude it is likely to behave the same way in the future

*asking the right questions

Question 8

Scientific method (6 steps)

Answer 8

1. Make observation.
2. Consider the cause by posing educated guesses (or hypotheses).
3. Make predictions about what we should expect to see if our hypotheses are correct.
4. If necessary, experimentation and data collection may be conducted.
5. Further observation is necessary, leading to 3 possible outcomes:
   a. If we observe that our data positively support our prediction, then we have hypothesis confirmation (at least for now, or tentatively).
   b. If we observe that our data do not support our prediction, then we have hypothesis falsification, and we may be forced to either give up or modify our hypothesis.
   c. If there are simply not enough data to decide either way, then we suspend judgment.
6. Consider any other competing hypotheses that provide an equally plausible or likely explanation of our observation. If there are, need to ask which seems more reasonable. If there are no others, then we may decide to tentatively accept the hypothesis based on the currently available information

Question 9

Bread in toaster example

Answer 9

1. The observation you make from this problem is that your toaster won’t toast.
2. The question, in this case, is, “Why isn’t my toaster working?”
3. The hypothesis should be a potential explanation or answer to the question. It should also be testable in some way and doesn’t necessarily have to be right. So in this case, let’s say your hypothesis is that the power outlet is broken.
4. Based on your hypothesis that the outlet might be broken, you predict that if you switch to another power outlet, your toaster will work and toast your bread.
5. Testing involves experimenting to see if your prediction is right. In this case, you switch power outlets, plug in your toaster, and see if it toasts.
   If that works and the toaster toasts your bread, then your hypothesis may be correct or “supported.” If the toaster doesn’t work, then your hypothesis may be wrong or “not supported.”
   Basically, the results of your experiment either support or oppose your hypothesis and prediction. You should note that just because the test supports your hypothesis, it’s not conclusive proof that the hypothesis is correct. It just means that it’s likely to be correct. But if the test results oppose your hypothesis, the hypothesis is most likely to be incorrect.
   When testing a prediction, always consider the possibility of a flaw that may cause contradictory results. If that’s the case, you need to do away with your hypothesis and make a new one.
6. Here, you reflect on your results and decide on your next step.
   If the test results supported your hypothesis — your toaster worked — you may decide to do further tests to confirm it or revise it. For example, you can decide to do more investigation on what’s wrong with the first outlet.
   If the test results did not support your hypothesis — your toaster failed to toast — you can form a new hypothesis. For example, your next hypothesis could be that the toaster has a broken wire.

Question 10

Important questions for studies

Answer 10

1. Who conducted the study?
2. What was the motivation for the study—in other words, why was it conducted in the first place?
3. Who funded the study?
4. What was the methodology of the study, or how was the study carried out? (Remember to consider sample size and representation.)
5. Is the study repeatable? That is, would any other scientists, under similar conditions, arrive at the same findings?

Question 11

Ch 6: FALLACIES

Answer 11

Error in reasoning

Inconsistencies and contradictions and hypocrisy (all are hypocrites, just vary by degree)
“Don’t let you feelings cloud your judgement”

Question 12

12/24 fallacies

Answer 12

● Ad Hoc Rescue
● Ad Hominem
● Argumentum ad Ignoratiam
● Appeal to Emotions or Force
● Begging the Question
● Confirmation Bias
● False Dichotomy
● Language Problems: Euphemisms, Vagueness, and Ambiguity
● Post Hoc Fallacy
● Red Herring
● Slippery Slope Fallacy
● Strawman Argument

Question 13

Ad Hoc Rescue

Answer 13

The term ad hoc is Latin and literally means “for this purpose.” It involves the addition of more premises in the attempt to save a particular belief or position

Ex. homeopathic medicine (placebo)

Ex. Jasmuheen - Breatharians
- occurs when someone comes up with a rationale or explanation to dismiss the counter-evidence to their claim in a bid to protect it

Ex.
● BETTY: If you take this herbal medicine for fourteen days, it will cure your migraine headaches.
● JOE: I took your advice, Betty, but I still had several migraines in the past two weeks.
● BETTY: Did you take it exactly as prescribed?
● JOE: Yes, I did.
● BETTY: Well, then, it must have been expired.
● JOE: No, it says on the box that it doesn’t expire for another two years.
● BETTY: Okay. Then, I suppose you picked the wrong brand name.
● JOE: But this is the brand you told me to buy.
● BETTY: Ah, then perhaps the company produced a low-dosage batch by mistake; that must be it.

Question 14

Ad Hominem - (the Real Daytime)

Answer 14

“Sticks and stones fallacy”

The term ad hominem means “against the man.” An abusive ad hominem occurs when we lose focus in our analysis and, instead of directing our attack against a person’s argument, focus on irrelevant qualities or characteristics of a person

● For example: Why on earth should we read anything written by Plato since it is clear that he was a homosexual?

● Jean Chretien example: 1993 Canadian Federal Election had Bell Palsy

Question 15

Argumentum ad Ignoratiam

Answer 15

“Argument to ignorance” Or “burden of proof fallacy” or “for all you know fallacy”

someone has taken the position that “I’m not absolutely sure it’s false, so it must be true” or “I’m not absolutely sure it’s true, so it must be false.”

Ex.
If we assume that ghosts or UFOs or psychic abilities exist because it has not been completely proven that they do not exist, we are fallaciously appealing to this kind of reasoning

*wanting something to be real vs demonstrating it

Question 16

Appeal to emotions or force

Answer 16

Sometimes people use pity in an irrelevant context to justify their beliefs and actions
● On some occasions pity is warranted
● The same is true for force
Ex Self defense - justified appeal to force

● You don’t win an argument by taking someone outside and beating them up
● But there are times when all measures have been explored and the only one left is force

● in same way: “can’t write test, the Jays are out of playoffs” isn’t a sufficient appeal to pity BUT “can’t write test because someone passed away” is a justified appeal to pity

*tricky because sometimes justifiable and other times not

Question 17

Begging the question

Answer 17

Circular reasoning

occurs whenever anyone assumes as a premise what they hope to support as a conclusion

Examples:
● The word of the Bible is true. For it says right in the Bible that it is the word of God, and God would never allow the Bible to contain false information.
● Loaded questions, leading the witness, etc.

*proper use should be “raises the Q” not begs

Question 18

Confirmation bias

Answer 18

“Hammer fallacy” or “fallacy of selective attention”

Difficult to escape
“When all have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”

This happens in cases where we unjustly make judgments about people because of preconceived ideas

Ex. Amanda Berry abducted for 10 years, raped and impregnated
- mother and Sylvia Brown on Psychic talk show where Sylvia says daughter is gone (dead) and has to let her go
- mom loses will to live, Amanda escapes

*people place greater importance on evidence (mom believing daughter to be dead “confirmed” by psychic) which supports what they already believe (mom initially believing daughter to be dead which is why she went on the show)

• consequence: psychic prey on human ignorance leading to her death

Question 19

False dichotomy

Answer 19

“Black or white fallacy” or “only 2 ways about it fallacy”

when someone attempts to state an argument in a way that leads us to believe there are only two alternatives

Either you are with us, or you are against us.

Ex.
The choice for American university students is clear: they can choose not to smoke marijuana and live a healthy, happy life, or they can choose to become addicted to the deadly weed, which will inevitably lead them to harder drugs and a life of crime.

Ex.
DAVID: Boy, I hate this weather [walking in a snowstorm].
ROY: Look at it this way: Either we get the snow or we get freezing rain. Which would you prefer?

Question 20

Language problems: euphemisms, vagueness and ambiguity

Answer 20

1. Euphemisms: Substituting mild or indirect terms for those more harsh

For example, “passed away” is often used instead of “died.”
Animals are “put to sleep” or “put down” rather than “killed.”
And companies “downsize” rather than “massively fire” employees.

Can also distort information, for example, using the term “police action” for “war,” or referring to a “clean bomb,” which kills people but leaves buildings standing

2. Vague term: lacking precise definition or meaning
   - Vague terms: Ted is a liberal thinker. Heather is a good student.
3. Ambiguous term: one that has two or more distinct meanings

Ex. Pork. The one you love (have sex with - wouldn’t know without prior knowledge of word “pork” meaning)

Ex. Chi-chi’s. When you feel a little Mexican (feel also means touch)

Question 21

Post Hoc fallacy

Answer 21

The complete name of the fallacy is actually post hoc ergo propter hoc, which means, “after this, therefore, because of this”

*assume that an event must have been the cause of later event because it happened earlier
EX. “The rooster crows always before the sun rises, therefore, the crowing rooster causes sun to rise” (rooster crowing = event A; sun rise = event B)

● Because A precedes B, A must cause B
● Not always the case
● Every Monday evening I put out the garbage on our curbside. And every Tuesday morning, a garbage truck picks it up. Therefore, my putting garbage out on the curb causes the garbage truck to come.

Question 22

Red herring

Answer 22

“something smells fishy fallacy” or the “beside the point fallacy,” or even the “smoke screen fallacy”

occurs whenever one uses a premise that is irrelevant to the conclusion, which distracts one away from the topic at hand—that is, when one shifts the topic in such a way that focus is no longer on the originally stated issue.

Sitcom Example: When a husband is caught leaving to play golf with his buddies rather than stay home and finish the yard work, and his wife confronts him, he might blurt out any number of distracting red herring remarks, such as, “Have I told you how attractive you look today?” or “I think we should go out for dinner tonight,” or “Have I told you how much I love you lately?”

Ex.
OJ Simpson Trial - his defence used this fallacy

• racism and cops going on at the time
• so though evidence overwhelmingly against him, Rodney King video getting beat up swayed people and jury that another black person is going to prison

Question 23

Slippery slope fallacy

Answer 23

Once one cause starts, it will create an effect that will be the cause of another effect, and so on, until the final effect is something really terrible

● Fallacious if you can demonstrate that one cause will not necessarily lead to others or the final effect

Example :
if don’t do your homework, you’ll fail the class. If you fail the class, you won’t graduate, if you don’t graduate, you won’t get into college. If you don’t attend a good college, you won’t get a good job.

Question 24

Strawman argument

Answer 24

“Mannequin fallacy” or “dummy fallacy”

*When take someone’s argument, misinterpret it, and attack the misinterpreted the argument.

We must take special care when interpreting someone’s argument regardless of whether we agree or disagree with it

If we misrepresent an argument, not only are we being unfair to the speaker, but we also may be referring to aspects of an issue that the speaker never intended

EX.
when one person says “I like Chinese more than Pizza”, and the respondent says “Well, you must hate Pizza”, they have created a strawman. The first person never said they hated pizza. They have been misrepresented. No matter your political position, we all run the risk of creating strawmen.

Want a steelman argument :
building the best form of the other side’s argument and then engaging with it

ex. Man that has old school Christian beliefs — disagree with him but have a conversation (he has a right to believe this… has right for freedoms of speech)

Question 25

Trump commits 3 fallacies

Answer 25

1. Claiming that Manafort represented high level people like Reagan, Dole, et al is a fallacy of irrelevance known as a Red Herring.
2. Stating that Trump didn’t know that Manafort was the head of the mob commits the fallacy of a Strawman. Nobody but Trump is stating such a thing. Therefore, his comment is rendered again, irrelevant.
3. When Trump asks: “What about Comey and Crooked Hilary and all the others?” he commits two fallacies: the first is an ad hominem attack against Hilary Clinton and the second is called Tu Quoque or ‘You too!’

Question 26

Spectral analysis

Answer 26

Establish two extremes

Determine where each is situated betw these extremes

Ex1 gun control
Either no guns at all except police or everyone has guns

Ex2 abortion
Either none at all or get one anytime

*where lie on spectrum because difficult to prove either end that’s justifiable and can make others accept

Question 27

Euthanasia, abortion, gun control, capital punishment, same-sex relationships, and religion

Answer 27

For Euthanasia: We should allow all citizens during any point in their illness – regardless of the severity of their condition – the right to decide when they wish to be humanely put to death.

Against Euthanasia: We should never allow any citizen under any circumstance to have their lives ended intentionally. We must do everything in our medical power to keep a person alive for as long as possible.

Abortion
Pro-Life: Never allow an abortion no matter what the circumstances or context of the pregnancy.

Pro-Choice: Always allow an abortion to proceed if a pregnant woman chooses to do so.

Pro-Gun: Allow total freedom of weapon possession in the home, in one’s vehicle, on a plane, on a train, with a goat, on a boat, on one’s person, to be carried while loaded anywhere at any time.

Anti-Gun: Collect and destroy all guns and legislate strict laws which have stiff penalties to anyone owning or carrying such a weapon.

Capital punishment
Pro-Death Penalty: There are specific crimes for which the death penalty is the only just penalty.

Anti-Death Penalty: No matter what the crime, no person should be put to death as a punishment.

Same-sex relationships
Conservative: Sexual education and practice is something to be taught by parents to their children when they have reached the appropriate ages of maturity. Sexual education should not be taught in schools at any age level. Religion often favors heavily in the determination of how sex is to take place. Various sexual acts and information are considered to be unacceptable. Same-sex marriage is forbidden.

Liberal: Sexual activity is a natural act. As such, it should be taught in schools at all levels according to the maturity and age of the students. Sexual freedom is tolerated provided that it takes place between consenting adults. There is nothing immoral or illegal about same sex marriage or same-sex acts.

Religion (theist vs atheist)
God exists: I know for sure that God exists and that my definition of him is 100% accurate and certain. Everyone who disagrees with me is wrong and will be punished eternally in the afterlife.

God does not exist: I know for sure that no Gods exist. Belief in God and organized religions serve absolutely no purpose and should be banished.