Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Lecture 7B: Fallacies and Failures of Relevance

Business:
1.  Lecture
2.  Practice
3.  Questions about midterm.

Review of HW 7A

Informal Fallacies:  Failures of Relevance
1.  
E.g., The budget proposal was a product of the Cato Institute. Obviously, if it's passed it will hurt the poor.

A: You can't trust the results of these studies on drug X, they were funded by Pfizer.

B: Obama's idea for the ACA came to him in a dream, so it must be horrible.

C: Killing is wrong because it says so in Holy Text X.







Explanation of the Genetic Fallacy:  When a claim is supported or dismissed based on its source rather than evidence for or against the claim.

2.  
A:  Why should I believe what he says about our economy? He's not even a citizen!

B:  You can't accept her advice. She is so old she has no idea what goes on in today's world.

C:  Why would you listen to him? He's too young to have any wisdom about life.

D*:  Of course Senator X thinks my administration's tax proposals are bad for the country. After all, his political party lost the last election, and everyone knows that losers are jealous.

E*:  You don't want cars to get better gas milage because you are a self-centered rich bastard who isn't affected by gas prices. All you care about it how big your engine is.

F*:  Of course you think that people should take drugs. You work for a pharmaceutical company and you make more money if more people take drugs.






Explanation of Ad hominem (against the person): When a claim is rejected or judged to be false based on an alleged character flaw of the person making the claim. A second form occurs whenever someone's statement or reasoning is attacked by way of a stereotype, such as a racial, sexual, or religious stereotype. A third form involves the use of circumstances of a person's life to reject his claims. Exception: denying someone's claim by calling them a liar and they have a reputation for being one.



3. 


B:  The pastor said I shouldn't cheat on my wife but I know he's cheated on his wife many times.  Why shouldn't I cheat on mine?

C:  "You're always telling us to do our homework and study. You didn't do your homework regularly when you were in school."

D:  Many Arab countries put house their prisoners in inhumane conditions. Who are they to lecture us about our prison practices?

E:  Beyonce told all the single ladies to throw their hands up at her, but she didn't throw her hands up! I shouldn't have to throw my hands up at her.








--So why did you contribute so much to this inequity Mr Greenspan? Sit down and shut up

--Ironic, considering his monetary policies while running the Fed helped in a big way with that.
says the chief enabler of the last 30 years...
--Considering he was largely responsible for the architecture that allowed this, he really should simply close his mouth.














Explanation to Tu Quo Que:  Another variety of ad hominem fallacy in which one person attempts to avoid the issue at hand by claiming the other person is a hypocrite.

4.
A:  All Monsanto cares about is making money.  Their seeds will harm farmers livelihood.

B:  Bob is a complete moron not only that but he'd steal from his own mother.  You shouldn't believe him when he says he'll help you with the garden.

C:  The tea party is made of irrational ideological extremists.  Nobody should take their budget reform policies seriously.





Explanation of Poisoning the Well:  Pre-emptive ad hominem to discredit the source/opponent before they make their point.




5.
Type 1:
A: You should go see a chiropractor for your asthma.  The treatment is all-natural and doesn't use synthetic chemicals.

B:  This all-natural seaweed and kale juice will prevent you from getting sick.

C:  With GMOs, they take a gene from one organism and put it in another.  It ain't natural!  GMOs must be bad for you.
Horizontal Gene Transfer

D: http://www.naturalnews.com/039803_indian_black_salve_cancer_cure_herb.html
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/eschar.html

E.






Naturalistic Fallacy Type 1:  Health claims that are supported by the fact that a food or modality is "natural".  The fact that something is "natural" doesn't tell us one way or another whether it is safe and efficacious.  

Fun fact: The majority of companies the FDA sent warning letters to were selling "natural" products. See also study and article
Many "all-natural" products are in fact adulterated with real drugs (so they work).
Especially "all-natural" "male enhancement" pills.

6.  
A:  Women have smaller brains/are physically weaker so they shouldn't be equal to men.

B:  Homosexuality isn't natural, so it's wrong.

C:  Infanticide is practiced by just about every species, therefore it's morally right.
infanticide in animals


D: 




Naturalistic Fallacy Type 2:  Arguing from a descriptive claim to a value or moral claim.



7. 

Type 1:
A:  The ancient Chinese have used acupuncture for 1000s of years to cure all sorts of ailments--it must work.

B: Soup sop juice


C: Buckthorn

Type 2:
D*:  Women have always worked in the kitchen, therefore that's were they should stay.

E*:  The traditional definition of marriage both around the world and in Western Society is between a man a several wives.  Therefore, we should uphold this definition of marriage and not permit gay marriage.

F* The Bible says that if an unmarried woman is raped, she must marry her rapist and he must pay her father 50 shekels, therefore this is what should be done. Deuteronomy 22:28







Explanation of Argument from Tradition/Ancient Authority:  Arguing that since since something was done traditionally that it must work/be good.  (Also applies to moral arguments)


8.





B:  Everybody agrees that moving US troops into the Crimean would be a bad idea.  We shouldn't do it.

C: Most people agree that vitamin C cures the common cold. Therefore, you should take it.
D: Most people agree that Hondas are better than Fords, therefore they are.

Explanation of Ad Populum (appeal to the people):  This fallacy is committed when the arguer appeals to popular opinion to support their claim.  Exceptions are cases where popular opinion is relevant (e.g., fashion).
Bandwagon Effect (variation of argument from popularity)  Often used in advertising through images of beautiful/happy people using a product...”you can be like us too!”


9.
A.


B:  The new PowerTangerine computer gives you the power you need. If you buy one, people will envy your power. They will look up to you and wish they were just like you. You will know the true joy of power. TangerinePower.

C:  The new UltraSkinny diet will make you feel great. No longer be troubled by your weight. Enjoy the admiring stares of the opposite sex. Revel in your new freedom from fat. You will know true happiness if you try our diet!

D:  His healthcare policy is un-American:  It needs to be repealed.

E:  A true American wouldn't cut funding from our troops.  Why do you hate America? 

F:  Give Bob a lighter sentence because he's an orphan that grew up in hardship. Have a heart! 







Explanation of Appeal to Emotions: When the arguer tries to elicit feelings of pity, outrage, compassion, pride, nationalism, etc...instead of providing reasons for or against a position.  Charities use this a lot in their advertising.  Political ads use it a lot too (appeal to nationalism).  Debatable cases: when human emotions are an important factor in the issue. 

10.

A:  If you don't get rid of your suspected chemical weapons we will bomb you.
B:  If you don't do your homework, I will beat you.




Appeal to Force: When the arguer essentially presents a threat of force instead of a reason for accepting a position.

11. 

A:  Professor Brown is a really hard grader. Not only does he force you to attend class, participate in discussion, and do homework. He actually expects us to think about the material outside of class. So, you can believe that his class teaches students nothing about real life.

B:  Ami likes cheese, ice cream, and yogurt. He should eat more vegetables.




Explanation of non-sequitur (missing the point): Generic catch-all name for arguments where the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises and the premises seem to suggest a different conclusion should be drawn.  Otherwise stated, if the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion and you can't classify why it's irrelevant we call it a non-sequitur.

12.
A: 

Appeal to (Unqualified) Authority (Arugmentum Ad Verecundiam—Arg. from reverence or respect):  When someone supports their claim by appealing to a non-expert on the subject.

Celebrity endorsements: Jenny McCarthy on vaccines, Oprah on psychology and medicine, Dr. vs medical researcher.







Midterm
1.  How to ensure good quality and successful group work.
2.  Questions?


HW 7B:
A:  Pick 1 fallacy and make a meme.
1.  Go to http://memegenerator.net/
2.  Click on "Images".
3.  Choose your meme.
4.  Create your meme.

B:  Challenge: Construct an argument for the moral permissibility of factory farms for animal meat without committing any fallacies.

No comments:

Post a Comment