Truth, Argument And Logic

Question 1

Sound argument

Answer 1

reliable machine and reliable material

Question 2

Valid (but unsound) argument

Answer 2

reliable machine but unreliable material

Question 3

Invalid argument (fallacy)

Answer 3

unreliable machine whatever the material

Question 4

Sources

Answer 4

Taking things on trust, checking and taking things on trust (again)

The power of the written word and what lies behind it

Reliability: paper, encyclopaedia, (academic) publisher, peer review journal

Question 5

The internet

Answer 5

quality control, domain names, hosts

The best is not on the internet

Finding material on the internet: search engines, portals, academic databases

Question 6

Critical reasoning

Answer 6

one sidedness, critical engagement balancing arguments

“Facts”, raw data, theory and interpretation

Primary texts, translation, secondary literature, good referencing

Question 7

Deductive fallacies

Answer 7

1 - inconsistency (P and not P, therefore Q)

2 - affirming the consequent (If P then Q, Q, therefore P)

3 - denying the antecedent (If P then Q, not P, therefore not Q)

4 - quantifier shift (composition/division, accident [generalisation from accidental property], failure to distinguish part/whole [division/composition])

5 - bad argument fallacy (P therefore Q is invalid, therefore not Q)

6 - mistaking cause and effect (post hoc ergo propter hoc)

7 - naturalistic fallacy (is/ought fallacy)

8 - non sequitur (jumping to conclusions, P therefore Q)

9 - failure to follow argument to conclusion (Schoppenhaur) ( If A then B, if B then C, if C then D, A but not D)

10 - misapplication of slippery slope (If A then B, if B then C, if C then D, if D…..Z, A therefore Z. Failure to admit exceptions or being more precise than subject allows)

11 - ambiguity/equivocation (whether of terminology or grammar)

Question 8

Inductive fallacies

Answer 8

1 - ignoring multiple causes (over simplification) (Chesterton ‘to simplify is to lie’) - black and white reasoning

2 - false dichotomy/false dilemma

3 - one sidedness (pro-con)

4 - misleading comparisons (all comparisons are odious)

5 - false analogy (all analogies limp: arguing by analogy)

6 - hasty generalisation (sample size [statistics], false stereotype)

7 - proof by lack of evidence/ignorance (argument ad ignoratum) (valid only to the extent that we have looked and ruled out other possibilities)

8 - disproof by lack of evidence incompleteness (ignorance) as proof of defect (valid only to the extent that e have looked and have good reason to expect evidence)

9 - genetic fallacy (valid only as part of explanation for error, but need to show error)

10 - argument from authority (argument at verecundiam) - appeal to tradition (version of appeal to authority)

Question 9

Fallacies of relevance

Answer 9

1 - irrelevant conclusion Ignoratio Elenchi (beside the point [red herring irrelevant to the issue], ignoring the question)

2 - straw man

3 - circular reasoning (begging the question [Petitio Principe] assume what we need to prove

4 - Ad hominem (abusive) - guilt by association (tarred with the same brush, ad hominem, negative authority), attacking character of opponent (playing man not ball)

5 - appeal to emotion (pity) (argument ad misericordiam) - argument ad populum (populist attempt to sway crown rather than reason)

6 - appeal to force (argument ad baculum)

7 - complex question

8 - bogus claims (lies!) - unwarranted associations

9 - loaded terms (‘neutral language’ emotive language - euphemism)