Terms Flashcards
Propositions
Statements that can be true or false
Arguments
Composed of premises and conclusions
Premises
Propositions that are supposed to support the conclusion (okay but what does that mean? Why tell me that? What’s the point?)
Deductive Arguements
Guarantee their conclusions
Mathematical, logical, Arguements from definition
Inductive Arguements
Supposed to make their conclusion probable
Analogies, authority, casual inferences, scientific reasoning, extrapolations
Validity
If premises are true, then the conclusion must be true
All pigs can fly.
Snowball is a pig.
Therefore, Snowball can fly (not sound but valid)
Sound Arguement
Valid and has true premises
Strength
Strong if inductive argument has true premises, then the conclusion is probably true
Cogency
Cogent Arguements is strong and has true premises
Fallacy
Type of bad arguement
Formal fallacies
Have bad structure
Informal Fallacies
Problem with their content
Affirming the consequent
If X, then Y
Y
Therefore, X
Denying the antecedent
If X, then Y
not X
therefore, not y
Fallacy fallacy
When someone uses the fact that a fallacy was committed to justify rejecting the conclusion of the fallacious argument
Begging the question
Occurs when one assumes the truth of the conclusion in one or more of the premises
Principle of Charity
An effort to interpret others’ reasoning in the best possible light
Confirmation Bias
Natural tendency to seeks out evidence that supports personal beliefs and to ignore evidence that undermines those beliefs
Cognitive Bias
Refers to the systemic ways in which people categorize and make sense of the world to make judgements and decisions
Alief
Automatic belief-like attitude that can explain how our instinctual responses can conflict with our reasoned-out beliefs (type of cognitive bias)
Anchoring
Human tendency to stick close to the FIRST piece of information we have a about a new domain
Heuristics
Rule of thumb, a ready strategy, or a shortcut
Representativeness
Cognitive bias in which an individual categorizes a new situation based on nearest prototype or representative experience in their mind
Availability
Cognitive bias in which an individual takes available information while not seeking out or considering unknown information resulting in a person jumping to conclusions
Selection Bias
When a sample is selected in such a way that it is not representative of the target population
Generalization
Based on an adequate number of relevant cases
Decision Making
System 1 is quick, automatic, and emotional
System 2 is deliberate, effortful, and calculating
Ad Hominem
Fallacy of relevance- committed when one attacks the person making an argument rather than argument itself
Genetic Fallacy
Fallacy of Relevance, committed when one argues that the origin of an idea is a reason of rejecting (or accepting) that idea
Straw Figure Fallacy
Fallacy of Relevance, committed when one misrepresents another’s argument then attacks the misrepresented (weaker) argument rather than the actual (stronger) argument
Red Herring Fallacy
Fallacy of Relevance, committed when one introduces an irrelevant topic
Appeal to Authority
Committed when one appeals to an unqualified authority in support of one’s claim
Appeal to Force Fallacy
Committed when one uses a threat to compel agreement with one’s claim
Appeal to Popularity Fallacy
Committed when one appeals to the popularity of a belief as a reason to affirm its truth
Appeal to Consequences Fallacy
Committed when one appeals to the bad (or good) consequences of accepting a claim as a reason to reject (or accept) it as true
Fallacy of Equivocation
Committed when one’s argument mistakenly used the same word in two different sense
Appeal to Ignorance Fallacy
Fallacy of Weak Induction, Committed when someone reasons from our lack of knowledge that a claim is false (or true) to the assertion the claim is true
Slippery Slope
Fallacy of Weak Induction, committed when someone argues, without sufficient reason, one event will lead to a series of events ultimately ending in some further event
Texas Sharpshooter
Fallacy of Weak Induction, committed when one selectively uses, or “cherry-picks”, only the evidence supporting their desired conclusion
Post Hoc
Fallacy of Weak Induction, committed when someone claims some event causes another just because the first event occurs before the second event
X Occurred before Y
Therefore: X caused Y
Hasty Generalization
Fallacy of Weak Induction, committed when someone gernalizes too quickly about a group of people, things, or events
False Dilemma Fallacy
Fallacy of Presumption, committed when one presumes that there are fewer options than there actually are (black and white or dichotomy)
Burden of Proof Shifting Fallacy
Fallacy of Presumption, committed when one presumes that one’s (implausible) claim is justified unless someone else demonstrates otherwise
Conclusion Indicators
Therefore, So, It follows that, Hence, Thus, Entails that, We may conclude that, Implies that, Wherefore, As a result
Premise Indicators
Because, For, Given that, In that, As, Since, As indicated by
Conclusions
Okay but why would anyone believe that? Give me a reasons or evidence for accepting that claim
Valid Structure
All X’s do Y
Z is an X
Therefore, Z does Y
