Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Ethics : 2292G > revision lecture > Flashcards

revision lecture Flashcards

1
Q

critical thinking

A

a method of evaluating information and argument’s, analyzing them logically and making a reasoned judgement

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

why is critical thinking important?

A

it is vital in all aspects of life, particularly in kin, to make evidence-based decisions in sports science and health

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

key concepts for critical thinking

A

1: evaluating arguments and their logic
2: recognizing biases that may distort reasoning

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

beliefs

A
  • can be true or false
  • when expressed in a declarative sentence, it becomes a claim
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

claims (the two types)

A

1: objective claim
2: subjective claim

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

objective claim

A

true or false, independent of personal feelings
(ie.the sky is blue)

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

subjective claim

A

true or false based on personal opinions or feelings (i.e. pizza is the best meal”)

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

arguments

A
  • consist of premises leading to a conclusion
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

cognitive biases

A
  • biases affect conclusions and reasoning, driven by external (cultural, social) and internal influences (emotional, psychological)
  • importance of recognizing biases like confirmation bias, anchoring, etc.. in research and practice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

ethics in kinesiology

A
  • deals with questions of good, right, duty, obligation, and virtue.
  • focus on making defensible ethical decisions based on impartially applied reasons.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

situational issues

A

application of critical thinking when evaluating sports techniques, training programs, or nutritional recommendations

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

real-world application

A

analyzing the validity of different training methods based on evidence
- ethical considerations in sports, such as fair play and doping

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

Aristotelian virtue of ethics

A

1: focus on virtues as habits for a flourishing life
2: virtues are the mean between two extremes
3: eudaemonia (flourishing) as the ultimate human goal

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

deontological ethics (Kantian)

A

1: morality based on rules and duties
2: actions are judged by their adherence to categorical imperatives
3: treat individuals as ends, not means

(is an ethical framework that emphasizes the importance of duty, rules, and principles in determining the morality of an action.)

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

utilitarianism (Mill’s)

A

1: right actions maximize happiness and minimize suffering
2: evaluation based on consequences of actions

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

existentialism

A

1: emphasizes individual freedom and responsibility
2: authenticity and good faith as central values

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

ethical theories

A

1: Aristotelian virtue of ethics
2: deontological ethics (Kantian)
3: utilitarianism (Mills)
4: existentialism
5: formalism

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

formalism

A

1: focus on adherence to established game rules
2: efficiency is sacrificed for the challenge provided by rules

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

conventionalism

A
  • importance of unwritten, agreed-upon norms or conventions within sports
  • these conventions shape how rules are interpreted and applied
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

broad internalism (interpretivism)

A
  • viewing sports as a mutual quest for excellence through challenges
  • emphasizes underlying purposes and values of the game
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

what are the types of arguments

A

1: deductive
2: inductive

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

deductive argument

A

premise provide conclusive proof for the conclusion if true

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

inductive argument

A

premises support the conclusion but do not ensure it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

unstated premises and conclusions

A

awareness of implicit elements within arguements

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

what are the means of persuasion?

A

1: ethos = credibility
2: pathos = emotional appeal
3: logos = logical reasoning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

the 4 principles by Beauchamp and childress

A

1: respect for autonomy
2: non-maleficence
3: beneficence
4: justice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

vagueness

A

occurs when a word or phrase’s meaning is unclear about what it includes or excludes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

importance of vagueness

A

critical in law, everyday communication, and setting precise standards (eg. speed limits)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

intentional use of vaugeness

A

sometimes used to avoid giving a precise answer in sensitive situations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

ambiguity

A

occurs when a word, phrase, or sentence has multiple meanings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

types of ambiguity

A

1: semantic = multiple meanings of words
2: syntactic = structure causes confusion)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Generality

A

refers to how broadly a term can be applied, often lacking specificity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

what are examples of generality?

A
  • terms like “fair play” and “sportsmanship” are both vague and general
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

3 types of purposes of definitions

A

1: lexical
2: precising
3: persuasive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

lexical

A

ordinary meaning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

precising

A

more precise in a specific context

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

persuasive

A

to influence emotions nad opinions

38
Q

the importance of defining words

A

clear definitions can prevent misunderstandings and manipulation

39
Q

credibility

A
  • evaluation of claims should consider both the content of the claim and the credibility of the source
    credible and non-credible claims
40
Q

evaluating the content of claims

A
  • claims should not conflict with established knowledge or credible sources
  • analysis of how personal observations and general knowledge can impact the acceptance of a claim
41
Q

the credibility of sources

A
  • impact of the sources background, experience, and potential biases on credibility
  • distinction between interested parties (biased) and disinterested parties (unbiased)
42
Q

critical thinking in media and advertising

A
  • understanding the role of media ownership and advertising in shaping information
  • recognizing bias and manipulative strategies in media and advertising
43
Q

logical fallacies

A

common logical fallacies in arguments is crucial to understand.
- fallacies disrupt the logic of an argument, leading to invalid or weak conclusions

44
Q

types of logical fallacies

A

1: ad hominem fallacy
2: straw man fallacy
3: false dilemma
4: begging the question

45
Q

ad hominem fallacy

A

attacking the person rather than the argument
3 types:
1: poisoning the well
2: guilt by association
3: genetic fallacy

46
Q

straw man fallacy

A

misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack.
- arguers create a distorted version of the opposing argument, making it easier to contend against

47
Q

false dilemma

A

presenting two options as the only possibilities, when more may exist
- limiting options unfairly, presenting a situation as having only two possible outcomes

48
Q

begging the question

A

a circular argument where the conclusion is included in the premise

49
Q

poisoning the well

A

apart of ad hominem fallacy
- discrediting what a person might say by attacking their credibility beforehand

50
Q

guilt by association

A

apart of ad hominem fallacies
- dismissing someone’s argument by associating them with an unpopular group or idea

51
Q

genetic fallacy

A

apart of ad hominem fallacies
- dismissing an argument based on its source rather than its merits

52
Q

what are common fallacies?

A

1: affirming the consequent
2: denying the antecedent
3: undistributed middle
4: equivocation
5: amphiboly

53
Q

example of affirming the consequent

A

if A, then B. B is true, therefore A is true (incorrect inference)

54
Q

example of antecedent

A

if A, then B. A is false, therefore B is false (invalid conclusion)

55
Q

composition

A

attributes of individual parts are erroneously applied to the whole

56
Q

division

A

attributes of the whole are erroneously applied to individual parts

57
Q

example of composition

A

just because individual politicians are popular does not mean the entire government is popular

58
Q

division example

A

believing that if a team is excellent, each player must also be excellent independently.

59
Q

equivocation and example

A

using a word in different meanings in an argument
ie. using “bank” to mean both the side of the river and a financial institution in an argument

60
Q

amphiboly and example

A

ambiguity arising from poor sentence structure
ie. “flying plans can be dangerous” is it dangerous to fly planes or are planes that are flying dangerous?)

61
Q

ethical considerations in anti-doping for sport

A
  • WADA’s criteria for banning substances: potential for enhancement, potential for harm, violation of the spirit of sport
  • ethical implications of procedural justice and transparency in anti-doping practices
62
Q

categorical logic

A

studies relationships of inclusion and exclusion among categories or classes

63
Q

deductive reasoning

A

relies on given premises to reach a definitive conclusion, proving it beyond doubt.

64
Q

categorical claims

A

1: A- claims: all S are P (universal affirmative)

2: E-claims: No S are P (universal Negative)

3: I-claims: some S are P (particular affirmative)

4: O-claims: Some S are not P (particular negative)

65
Q

venn diagrams

A

visual tool to represent categorical claims and their relationships

66
Q

categorical syllogisms

A

deductive arguments with two premises and a conclusion, all in categorical form

67
Q

components of categorical syllogisms

A

1: major term - appears in the predicate of the conclusion

2: minor term - appears in the subject of the conclusion

3: middle term = appears in both the premises but not in the conclusion

68
Q

the square of opposition

A

analyze the logical relationship between different types of categorical propositions
(contraries, subcontraries, contradictories)

69
Q

standard form translation

A

converting everyday language into precise categorical terms

70
Q

contradictories

A

a statement and its contradictory cannot both be true, and they cannot both be false at the same time. one must be true, and the other must be false

71
Q

rules for testing validity

A

rule 1: negative premises vs conclusion

rule 2: distribution of the middle term

rule 3: distribution in conclusion

72
Q

value judgements and the 3 types

A

value judgements are assessments concerning merit, desirability, or praiseworthiness

1: moral judgements
2: nonmoral judgements
3: aesthetic judgements

73
Q

moral judgements

A

pertaining to right or wrong, ethical considerations

74
Q

nonmoral judgements

A

merchantability, usability, etc

75
Q

aesthetic judgements

A

beauty, artistry, and taste

76
Q

principles of moral reasoning

A

1: consequentialism
2: deontologism
3: virtue ethics
4: existentialism

77
Q

consistency principle

A

treat similar cases similarly unless distinguished by a morally relevant factor

78
Q

consequentialism

A

focus on the outcome for determining rightness

79
Q

deontologism

A

emphasis on duties and obligations

80
Q

virtue ethics

A

concentration on the virtues of the person involved

81
Q

esistentialism

A
  • emphasizes individual freedom and responsibility
  • authenticity and good faith as central values
82
Q

legal reasoning in kin

A

1: precedent (stare decisis): following previous judicial decisions

2: reasoning types
1: deductive reasoning: applying general rules to specific cases
2: inductive reaosning: forming general rules from specific incidents

83
Q

rhetorical force

A

Refers to the persuasive power of language and argumentation used to influence readers opinion or attitudes

This may include using vivid language, emotional appeals (pathos), or rhetorical devices to make a claim more compelling or persuasive

84
Q

probative weight

A

This refers to the value or strength of the evidence provided to support the claim in scientific writing.

Probative weight is determined by the quality, relevance, and reliability of the evidence presented, using experimental data, statistical analysis, peer-reviewed research, or logical reasoning.

85
Q

Euphemism

A

The use of mild or indirect expressions used in place of harsh, unpleasant, or taboo words or phrases to soften the impact of the message or make it more socially acceptable.

86
Q

what is this an example of “passed away” instead of “dead” or “died”

A

euphemism

87
Q

dysphemism

A

Refers to the use of harsh, offensive, or derogatory language to describe someone or something, often with their intention of eliciting negative emotions or attitudes.

88
Q

what is this an example of “junkie” instead of “person with a substance abuse disorder”

A

dysphemism

89
Q

weasel words

A

Words or phrases that are intentionally vague, ambiguous, or misleading, often used to avoid making a direct commitment, assertion, or statement of fact.

Commonly used in persuasive writing, advertising, politics, and other forms of communication to manipulate perceptions or evade accountability

90
Q

what would this be an example of “some people say” or “many experts agree”

A

weasel words

91
Q

hyperbole

A

Figure of speech characterized by exaggerated or over-the-top language used for emphasis, or rhetorical effect.

It involves stretching the truth beyond literal accuracy to create a vivid or dramatic impression, often for humorous, dramatic, or persuasive purposes.

92
Q
A

Ethics : 2292G (9 decks)

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