PHL 3000: Critical Thinking Week 6 Notes
PHL 3000: Critical Thinking Week 6 Notes PHL 3000
Popular in Critical Thinking
Popular in Philosophy
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Haley Cochran on Monday October 10, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PHL 3000 at Wright State University taught by Dr. Scott Wilson in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 5 views. For similar materials see Critical Thinking in Philosophy at Wright State University.
Reviews for PHL 3000: Critical Thinking Week 6 Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 10/10/16
Critical Thinking October 7th Fallacies of Weak Induction ➢ Arguments in which it is claimed that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is likely to be true. ➢ In these fallacies, the premises are relevant to the conclusion. ➢ However, the connection between premises and conclusion is very weak. Appeal to Unqualified Authority ➢ Occurs anytime someone supports a conclusion by relying on the testimony of someone who, although an authority on some matter, is not an authority on the topic under consideration. ○ My doctor is going to buy stock xyz, so I will too. ○ Pamela Anderson hates furs, you should too. ○ *Question: Who are the qualified authorities? ■ Cannot be answered in a general way Appeal to Ignorance ➢ Occurs anytime someone concludes that, since a certain statement has not been proven true (false), that it must be relevant considerations. ○ Bob tried to prove that ghosts don’t exist. ■ Since he failed, ghosts are real. Hasty Generalization ➢ Occurs anytime someone concludes something on the basis of a non-representative examples. ○ Be sure to ask if you are relying on a closed group thinking. ○ Seek alternative sources. False Cause ➢ Occurs whenever someone argues that X causes Y, yet it is probably not true that X causes Y. ○ Every time I wash my car it rains, I must control the weather. ○ The coin has come up heads 10 times in a row; tails is due. ○ Our generation lives longer than any that came before it. Nutritional sciences is a wonder. ■ Claiming a small part of the cause is the whole cause. Slippery Slope ➢ Occurs any time someone claims that a conclusion follows from a faulty chain of cause and effect. Weak Analogy ➢ Analogical Reasoning: ○ X has properties A,B,C Y has properties A,B,C,D Therefore, X probably has D as well. ○ Since running and swimming places similar stress on the body, and since stretching is good for runners, stretching is probably good for swimmers. ○ No one would buy shoes without trying them on first, why would you get married without having sex first. ■ Very weak argument.