Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Critical Thinking > Module 9B > Flashcards

Module 9B Flashcards

1
Q

Inductive Arguments

A

Inductive arguments are employed not only when drawing conclusions about an entire group based on an observed portion but also when investigating the causes of events.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Purpose of Inductive Arguments:

A

Inductive arguments serve the dual purpose of making generalisations about a group and exploring the complexities of causation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Complexity of Causation

A

The topic of causation is intricate and a frequent source of philosophical controversy, making it challenging to address all aspects in this unit.

The unit focuses on addressing specific issues related to inferences about causes due to the complexity of the causation topic, acknowledging that it cannot cover all philosophical controversies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Philosophical Controversy

Question: What characterizes the topic of causation in the context of inductive arguments?

A

The topic of causation is extremely complicated and a frequent source of philosophical controversy, introducing challenges in making definitive conclusions about causes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Inferences about Causes

Question: What is the primary focus in the unit regarding the use of inductive arguments?

A

The unit primarily addresses specific issues related to inferences about causes using inductive arguments, recognizing the inherent complexity of the causation topic.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Causation in Philosophy

A

The topic of causation has been a challenge for philosophers throughout history.

Providing a precise analysis of the concept of cause is difficult due to its varied usage, covering different meanings.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Difficulty in Defining Cause

A

The concept of cause is challenging to define precisely because it is sometimes considered a sufficient condition, a necessary condition, or a set of necessary and sufficient conditions, as highlighted by Govier.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Intuitive Understanding of Causation

A

Intuitively, stating that A caused B implies that A brought about or contributed to B’s occurrence, and in some sense, A necessitated B or was part of the factors that necessitated B.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Challenges in Precision

A

Challenges arise when attempting to provide a more precise account of causation.

Defining what causes are essentially is not straightforward, although examples can be easily given, and criteria can often be established in many contexts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Primary Knowledge of Causes

A

Our primary knowledge of causes comes from our actions, where we have control over our limbs and use implements like shovels, knives, and pens.

While this knowledge is crucial, there’s a desire to extend understanding to discover patterns, causal laws, and factors contributing to events of broader interest.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Extending Knowledge of Causes

A

The goal is to extend knowledge beyond personal actions to uncover patterns between events, identify causal laws, and understand factors contributing to various phenomena.

This includes exploring topics like bodily functions, health preservation, plant growth, and the construction and improvement of objects like boats, bridges, and engines.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Observation of Causal Patterns

A

A significant part of observing causal patterns involves discovering correlations between types of events, providing insights into the relationships and connections between different phenomena.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Correlation in Arguments

A

The concept of correlation is crucial, especially when evaluating arguments that utilize statistical premises.

It plays a significant role in interpreting statistical information and drawing meaningful conclusions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Significance of Correlation

A

Correlation is vital for understanding relationships between different characteristics, particularly in cases where statistical data is used. It helps assess the strength and direction of connections between variables.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Alarming Statistics Example

Question: Why might a statistic like 66% of male alcoholics being married sound alarming?

A

The statistic is alarming only if there is a positive correlation between being married and being alcoholic. It’s important to consider the percentage of married men in the male population for context.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Application of Correlation

A

The concept of correlation finds wide application, especially in cases where relationships can be established between pairs of characteristics.

Examples include being male/female, dead/alive, alcoholic/non-alcoholic.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Concentration on Correlations

A

This unit focuses on cases where correlations can be drawn between pairs of characteristics, providing a deeper understanding of the relationships between various attributes, such as gender, life status, and drinking habits.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

examples of Contrived Correlations

Question: Provide examples of correlations that might seem a bit contrived.

A

Examples include blue/non-blue, being older than 40/being 40 and under.

While somewhat contrived, these examples still serve a useful purpose in exploring the concept of correlation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Division of Population

A

We focus on cases where the population under study can be divided based on two characteristics, A and B, creating groups of A’s and non-A’s, as well as B’s and non-B’s.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Positive Correlation

A

If a higher proportion of A’s than non-A’s are B’s, it indicates a positive correlation between being A and being B.

This suggests a connection between the two characteristics.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Negative Correlation

A

If a smaller proportion of A’s than non-A’s are B’s, it signifies a negative correlation between being A and being B.

This implies an inverse relationship between the two characteristics.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

No Correlation

A

If the same proportion of A’s as non-A’s are B’s, it indicates no correlation between being A and being B.

This suggests that the presence or absence of A does not influence the likelihood of B.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Implications of Correlation Definitions

A

Positive correlation between A and B implies a negative correlation between non-A and B.

Additionally, if there is a positive correlation between A and B, there is also a positive correlation between B and A.

24
Q

Correlation Symmetry

A

The definitions imply symmetry in correlations; if there’s a positive relationship between A and B, the same holds for B and A.

Similarly, if there’s a negative correlation between A and B, there is also a negative correlation between B and A.

25
Q

Causal Relationships and Observation

A

Many causal relationships involve events we don’t directly observe or the exercise of relevant causal powers that are not directly witnessed.

Observations often focus on the relationships between events and patterns of association, providing evidence for potential cause and effect.

26
Q

Evidence through Association

A

Repeated patterns of association between events of different types, such as C and E, suggest that the events are not accidentally related.

This association may indicate a causal relationship between the observed events.

27
Q

Positive Correlation

Positive Correlation Example

A

Events A and B are positively correlated when the proportion of A’s that are B’s is greater than the proportion of non-A’s that are B’s.

For example, smoking (A) being positively correlated with lung cancer (B) suggests that smoking may be a cause of lung cancer.

Smoking (A) is positively correlated with lung cancer (B) because the percentage of smokers with lung cancer is higher than the percentage of non-smokers with lung cancer.

28
Q

Negative Correlation

Negative Correlation Example

A

Events A and B are negatively correlated when the proportion of A’s that are B’s is less than the proportion of non-A’s that are B’s.

For instance, being inoculated with the cowpox vaccine (A) is negatively correlated with being a smallpox sufferer (B), suggesting that the vaccine may prevent smallpox.

Being inoculated with the cowpox vaccine (A) is negatively correlated with being a smallpox sufferer (B) because the percentage of those receiving the vaccine and still getting smallpox is smaller than the percentage who do not receive the vaccine and get smallpox.

29
Q

Positive Correlation and Causal Link

A

Although a positive correlation may suggest a potential causal link, it is a common fallacy to directly argue from the presence of a positive correlation between A and B to the conclusion that A is the cause of B.

30
Q

Fallacy in Causation Inference

A

The logic of correlations and causes explains why inferring causation directly from correlation is fallacious.

While ‘x is positively correlated with y’ is symmetric, implying ‘y is positively correlated with x’, the relation ‘x is a cause of y’ is asymmetric, implying ‘y is not the cause of x’.

31
Q

Term: Symmetry in Positive Correlation

Question: What is a characteristic of the relationship expressed by ‘x is positively correlated with y’?

A

The relationship is symmetric, meaning ‘x is positively correlated with y’ entails that ‘y is positively correlated with x’.

32
Q

Asymmetry in Causal Relation

Question: What characteristic distinguishes the relationship expressed by ‘x is a cause of y’?

A

The relationship is asymmetric, meaning ‘x is a cause of y’ entails that ‘y is not the cause of x’.

33
Q

Correlations and Explanations

A

Relating correlations to inductive arguments involving inferences to the best explanation, consider a positive correlation between (A) drinking moderately and
(B) having a high wage.

Various explanations could exist, and proper inferences to causation require excluding alternative explanations.

34
Q

Explanations for Positive Correlation

A

When observing a positive correlation between (A) drinking moderately and (B) having a high wage, potential explanations include:

1) Drinking moderately causally increases income.

2) Having a high income leads to moderate drinking.

3) Some third factor influences both moderate drinking and high income.

4) The correlation is coincidental and disappears when studying more populations.

35
Q

Fallacy in Inferring Causation

A

It is fallacious to infer that A causes B solely based on a positive correlation between them.

Proper inferences to causation require eliminating alternative explanations, such as the second, third, and fourth possibilities mentioned.

36
Q

Proper Inferences from Correlation to Cause

A

Inferences from correlation to cause must be supported by reasons for excluding alternative explanations.

Merely observing a positive correlation is insufficient; careful consideration of potential causal relationships and eliminating other possibilities is necessary.

37
Q

Eliminating Possible Explanations

A

Eliminating the second possible explanation of a correlation becomes easier when knowing the temporal order of events.

If the later event occurs after the earlier one, it cannot be the cause.

Lack of knowledge about temporal order may complicate the elimination of the possibility that B causes A.

38
Q

Temporal Order in Elimination

A

Knowing which type of event occurs first in time helps eliminate the possibility that the later event is the cause of the earlier one.

Temporal order clarification is crucial in assessing causation.

39
Q

Background Knowledge in Elimination

A

Eliminating the third possible explanation requires consulting background knowledge about whether common causes of A and B are likely.

In cases where knowledge is insufficient, sophisticated research may be necessary for a thorough elimination.

40
Q

Common Causes and Elimination

A

To eliminate the third possible explanation, assessing common causes of A and B is essential.

Limited background knowledge may necessitate further research for a comprehensive elimination.

41
Q

Limitations in Elimination

A

The fourth possibility, that the correlation is coincidental, cannot be conclusively eliminated through scientific reasoning.

The longest a correlation persists, the more reasonable it is to assume it’s not accidental, but certainty remains elusive.

42
Q

Persistence and Accidental Correlation

A

Scientific reasoning cannot definitively eliminate the fourth possibility of accidental correlation.

The longer a correlation persists, the more likely it is not accidental, but absolute certainty is challenging to achieve.

43
Q

Hasty Generalization

A

Hasty Generalization is a fallacy where conclusions are drawn based on insufficient inductive evidence, often leading to unjustified inferences about other social groups.

The weakness lies in the small evidence base, making the support for the generalization weak.

44
Q

Trouble in Hasty Generalization

A

The issue is not with reaching generalizations, as many are well-justified and true.

The problem arises when the evidence is too small, compromising the strength of the support for the generalization.

Faulty moral conclusions may result from hasty generalizations that highlight differences between certain groups.

45
Q

Post Hoc Fallacy

A

he Post Hoc Fallacy involves concluding that A causes B simply because A occurred before B.

Treating the temporal sequence as a sufficient condition for causation is the fallacy, ignoring other necessary conditions.

46
Q

Necessary vs. Sufficient Conditions

A

Happening before B is a necessary condition for A causing B.

However, the Post Hoc Fallacy wrongly treats this necessary condition as though it were a sufficient condition for establishing A causing B.

47
Q

Objectionable Cause

A

The Objectionable Cause fallacy occurs when causal conclusions are drawn based on scanty evidence.

Typically, the evidence fails to rule out other potential explanations for the observed correlation, making the inference weak and objectionable.

48
Q

Weakness in Objectionable Cause

A

The weakness in the Objectionable Cause fallacy lies in the lack of evidence that rules out alternative explanations for the observed correlation.

Causal conclusions drawn from insufficient evidence are objectionable due to their limited support.

49
Q

“A positive correlation between A and B is some evidence that there is a causal link between A and B.”

A

True

Good. But don’t confuse “some evidence that there is a causal link between A and B” with “A caused B.” These are very different.

50
Q

“A population is analysed with respect to the categories A, non-A, B and non-B. If a higher proportion of A’s than non-A’s are B’s, then there is a positive correlation between being A and being B.”

A

true

51
Q

“If there is a positive correlation between A and B, then there is a negative correlation between non-A and B.”

A

true

52
Q

“If there is a positive correlation between A and B, then there must be a causal link between A and B.”

A

False

Might be, sure. Must be? No. Correlation is not causation.

53
Q

“Inductive arguments with biased samples are worthless.”

A

false

54
Q

“The only perfectly representative sample is a randomly selected sample.”

A

false

55
Q

“The relation of causation is an asymmetric relation.”

A

True

Symmetric relation: Where X bares the F-relation to Y, Y bares the F-relation to X.

Asymmetric relation: Where X bares the F-relation to Y, it is not the case that Y bares the F-relation to X.

Causation: Where X caused Y, it is not the case that Y caused

56
Q

“The relation of positive correlation is a symmetric relation.”

A

True

Critical Thinking (18 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions