Problem 1 Flashcards
Conspiracy theory
Refers to the belief that some covert but influential agency is responsible for an unexplained event
–> based on prejudice + insufficient evidence
Conspiracy theories can be more directly seen as matter of faith due to their lack of evidence.
How then are their arguments and beliefs held alive and reinforced ?
By resisting falsification and using circular reasoning
Circular reasoning
Refers to an argument that restates rather than proves, by using the conclusion as on of its premises
–> reinforces conspiracy theories, confirmation bias
ex.: only a mentally ill person would kill so all killers are mentally ill
Falsification
Refers to the ability of data to be disproved or otherwise explained
Why can written reasoning make it hard to evaluate arguments objectively ?
- Texts leave space for personal interpretation
2. Arguments are represented sequentially
Before building an argument map it is useful to analyze a text at a microlevel.
For this, one can look for cues towards the relationships between the statements in the text, as it will contain signal or indicator words for … and … ?
- Consequences/Conclusions
ex. : so, therefore, hence - Premises/Reasons
ex. : because, since, being as
What can be useful when trying to determine the direction of the argument in the absence of signal words ?
The so/because test
ex.: Grass is green because it contains chlorophyll vs so it contains chlorophyll
Name the 3 key components an argument map/tree usually includes.
- Conclusion
- Arguments/Premises PRO
- Arguments/Premises CONTRA
Contention
Refers to an idea that somebody claims is true
–> subtype of conclusion
Reason/Premise
Refers to evidence for the contention
Objection/Counterargument
Refers to evidence against the contention
Conclusion
Refers to contention supported by a reason or refuted by a counterargument
Single argument
Refers to an arguments that includes a single reason or objection
Composite/Multiple argument
Refers to an argument that includes more than one reason or objection
Convergent argument
Refers to an argument that includes 2 independent reasons supporting the conclusion
Chain of reasoning
Occurs when the contention operates as the premise for a conclusion at a higher level
Co-premises
When several premises/reasons together from a source of evidence for a conclusion
–> bridges the logical gab between conclusion + premise
Dependent premises
Refer to syllogisms
–> form of co-premises
Golden rule
Each single argument consists of 2 or more co-premises
–> necessity of co-premise to bridge gaps between premise + conclusion
Rabbit rule
Each significant term that is part of the conclusion should be part of one of the premises
–> ensures connection between premise + contention
Holding hands rule
A term that is part of one of the premises but not contention should also form part of the other premise
–> ensures a connection between co-premises
Dispute
Refers to a claim to which several reasons + objections are linked
Which are frequently encountered errors in building an argument ?
- Difficulty determining whether 2 premises are independent or dependent
- Using chains of reasoning when form of argumentation with dependent premises is appropriate
- Representation of conditional constructions as a chain of reasoning
Warrant
Refers to a justification why a particular premise provides support for a particular claim
