1. http://rbutr.com/
2. right click/ control click on images
Counter-Arguments to Analogies
In addition to evaluating the 4 criteria from the previous lesson (total number of relevant similarities vs total number of relevant dissimilarities, total number of instances, diversity of cases), there are a few other ways to directly criticize arguments from analogy.
A. Disanalogy: If you can find more relevant dissimilarities than relevant similarities between the sample and the target then you have shown the analogy to be weak.
B. Logical Counter-Example (AKA Counter-Analogy): Another way to undermine an analogy is to show that the shared properties (w, x, y) between the sample and the target don't necessarily imply the inferred property (z). For example, in the teleological argument complexity is supposed to be predictive of having a designer. But we can show that this isn't always necessarily true: snowflakes and crystals have complex structures yet are the result of simple natural laws. Coming up with counter-analogies undermines the strength of the relationship between the properties held in common (w, x, y) and the inferred property (z).
C. Unintended Consequences: You can undermine an analogy by showing that its logical consequences entail a conclusion that is undesirable to the person who is making the original argument. For example, in the teleological argument we see that the more complex an object is the greater the number of designers/builders it has (think of how many people it takes to make a car/computer/skyscraper). So, the logical consequence of the analogy is that the universe must have many designers and creators not just one as William Paley hoped to prove.
D. Measurement errors/straw man alert: Does the sample really have the properties being ascribed to it? Does the target really have the properties being ascribed to it? If either the sample or the target don't actually have the properties being ascribed to them, then there is no analogy. In the political domain, this is often the case when an opponents policy is being criticized because the opponent's position is often presented as a straw man.
Interesting and Controversial Analogies
A. We should not blame the media for deteriorating moral standards. Newspapers and TV are like weather reporters who report the facts. We do not blame weather reports for telling us that the weather is bad. http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/arg/analogy.php
B. Democracy does not work in a family. Parents should have the ultimate say because they are wiser and their children do not know what is best for themselves. Similarly the best form of government for a society is not a democractic one but one where the leaders are more like parents.
C. "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church." - St. Paul, Ephesians 5:22.
D. In the early 17th century, astronomer Francesco Sizi argued that there are only seven planets: "There are seven windows in the head, two nostrils, two ears, two eyes and a mouth; so in the heavens there are two favorable stars, two unpropitious, two luminaries, and Mercury alone undecided and indifferent. From which and many similar phenomena of nature such as the seven metals, etc., which it were tedious to enumerate, we gather that the number of planets is necessarily seven."
E. Trolly problems and surgeon. Disanalogy, surgeon=unintended consequences; (a) care for the one, let 5 die (b) transplant.
F. Taxation is just like slavery. You're forcing a man to give up his property and to use it for things he might not otherwise support. If slavery is wrong, so is taxation.
G. Gay rights are just an extension of the civil rights movement. The issues for the gay community are the same as those for the black community in the 60s. It was right to support the movement then, it's right to support the movement now.
Nay: http://illinois.edu/lb/article/72/75283 and http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/in-the-line-of-fire/41142-comparing-black-civil-rights-to-gay-civil-rights
Yay: http://www.truthwinsout.org/opinion/2013/09/37357/
H. Gay marriage and interracial marriage are relevantly similar. It's wrong to oppose interracial marriage so it's wrong to oppose gay marriage. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/24/opposing-gay-marriage-doesn-t-make-you-a-crypto-racist.html
I. We don't blame cars for drunk drivers, why should we blame guns for violent people? It doesn't make sense to legislate against guns.
J. Chemical X caused cancer in rats. It's going to cause cancer in humans too.
K. Cell phones, wallets, and warrantless searches:
""In limited circumstances, where the privacy interests implicated by the search are minimal and where an important governmental interest furthered by the intrusion would be placed in jeopardy by a requirement of individualized suspicion" a search [or seizure] would still be reasonable.[77]"
L. Corporate personhood: Should a corporations have the same rights as individuals?
HW 15B
1. At the bottom of analogy K is a link to an NPR article/report on the supreme court ruling on whether wallets are analogous to cell phones. Read or listen to the report then put the analogy into standard form. Make an argument for whether you think the analogy is strong, medium, or weak.
2. Pick any two other sample analogies, put them into standard form, then justify your evaluation.
F. Taxation is just like slavery. You're forcing a man to give up his property and to use it for things he might not otherwise support. If slavery is wrong, so is taxation.
G. Gay rights are just an extension of the civil rights movement. The issues for the gay community are the same as those for the black community in the 60s. It was right to support the movement then, it's right to support the movement now.
Nay: http://illinois.edu/lb/article/72/75283 and http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/in-the-line-of-fire/41142-comparing-black-civil-rights-to-gay-civil-rights
Yay: http://www.truthwinsout.org/opinion/2013/09/37357/
H. Gay marriage and interracial marriage are relevantly similar. It's wrong to oppose interracial marriage so it's wrong to oppose gay marriage. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/24/opposing-gay-marriage-doesn-t-make-you-a-crypto-racist.html
I. We don't blame cars for drunk drivers, why should we blame guns for violent people? It doesn't make sense to legislate against guns.
J. Chemical X caused cancer in rats. It's going to cause cancer in humans too.
K. Cell phones, wallets, and warrantless searches:
""In limited circumstances, where the privacy interests implicated by the search are minimal and where an important governmental interest furthered by the intrusion would be placed in jeopardy by a requirement of individualized suspicion" a search [or seizure] would still be reasonable.[77]"
Motor vehicle[edit]
Main article: Motor vehicle exception
The Supreme Court has held that individuals in automobiles have a reduced expectation of privacy, because vehicles generally do not serve as residences or repositories of personal effects. Vehicles may not be randomly stopped and searched; there must be probable cause or reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Items in plain view may be seized; areas that could potentially hide weapons may also be searched. With probable cause to believe evidence is present, police officers may search any area in the vehicle. However, they may not extend the search to the vehicle's passengers without probable cause to search those passengers or consent from the passengers.[105]
In Arizona v. Gant (2009),[106] the Court ruled that a law enforcement officer needs a warrant before searching a motor vehicle after an arrest of an occupant of that vehicle, unless 1) at the time of the search the person being arrested is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment of the vehicle or 2) police officers have reason to believe that evidence for the crime for which the person is being arrested will be found in the vehicle.[107]
Searches incident to a lawful arrest[edit]
Main article: Searches incident to a lawful arrest
A common law rule from Great Britain permits searches incident to an arrest without a warrant. This rule has been applied in American law, and has a lengthy common law history.[108] The justification for such a search is to prevent the arrested individual from destroying evidence or using a weapon against the arresting officer. In Trupiano v. United States (1948), the Supreme Court held that "a search or seizure without a warrant as an incident to a lawful arrest has always been considered to be a strictly limited right. It grows out of the inherent necessities of the situation at the time of the arrest. But there must be something more in the way of necessity than merely a lawful arrest."[109] In United States v. Rabinowitz (1950), the Court reversed Trupiano, holding instead that the officers' opportunity to obtain a warrant was not germane to the reasonableness of a search incident to an arrest. Rabinowitz suggested that any area within the "immediate control" of the arrestee could be searched, but it did not define the term.[110] In deciding Chimel v. California (1969), the Supreme Court elucidated its previous decisions. It held that when an arrest is made, it is reasonable for the officer to search the arrestee for weapons and evidence.[111]
http://www.npr.org/2014/04/29/308068253/supreme-court-considers-where-lines-drawn-in-cell-phone-searchesL. Corporate personhood: Should a corporations have the same rights as individuals?
HW 15B
1. At the bottom of analogy K is a link to an NPR article/report on the supreme court ruling on whether wallets are analogous to cell phones. Read or listen to the report then put the analogy into standard form. Make an argument for whether you think the analogy is strong, medium, or weak.
2. Pick any two other sample analogies, put them into standard form, then justify your evaluation.
No comments:
Post a Comment