1. Show some of the best. (Didn't have time to post all)
2. Some people didn't quite get it. (Read the instructions, bad argument vs the specific fallacies, completing the explanation).
3. Bonus. (Nicole Cobeo)
4. Quick review of key concepts.
Examples of Common Beliefs
Burden of Proof
1. BoP and Conclusions: Starting point for who has to provide evidence and how much.
2. Context and BoP: Historical, Cultural, and Audience.
Women's Education Group
3. BoP and Arguments from Authority
4. Proving a Negative/Arguments from Ignorance/Inappropriate burdens of proof.
5. Null hypothesis and Gumballs
BoP and Premise Acceptability
Premise Acceptability
1. General Heuristic: Acceptable vs Unacceptable
Step 1: Would the audience accept the claim without further support?
Step 2: Are the claims reasonable?
If the argument is for a universal audience then (1) also satisfies (2).
Step 3: Move up the layers in the argument applying (1) and (2).
Unacceptable: If at any stage the answer to either (1) and (2) are "no", then further support is needed.
Questionable: The wording is vague OR there isn't enough information to decide either way OR you don't have the background knowledge to decide either way OR any combination.
When you evaluate a premise as "questionable" you must support this assessment by citing one of the aforementioned reasons. Also, when you evaluate a premise as questionable, you must employ the principle of charity and ask "what evidence would have to be provided for this premise to be acceptable". If that evidence would be accepted by a reasonable audience, then you may give the premise the benefit of the doubt (for homework and tests, you show this process in writing).
Exercises: Do 8A 1, 2, 3.
Conditions of Premise Acceptability: The Nitty-Gritty
1. Acceptable by Definition or Self-Evidentially Acceptable.
E.g. Bachelor, triangle,
E.g. Law of non-contradiction, law of the excluded middle, disjunctive syllogism
2. Acceptable as a Factual Statement Reporting an Observation or as a Statement of Eye-Witness Testimony.
E.g., "It's cold outside"
E.g., "Yesterday, I ate eggs for dinner."
Issue: Grant benefit of the doubt unless the source is known to be unreliable.
3. Acceptable by Common Knowledge or Assent
Issue: Distinguish between descriptive and normative claim/judgments.
E.g., The ACA was drafted by the Obama administration.
E.g., The ACA is a horrible/excellent piece of legislation drafted by the Obama legislation.
Issue: Factual claims directed at expert audiences vs universal audiences. Unless the claim is directed at a universal audience, it's acceptable.
Issue: Actual vs. expected knowledge of the audience. Availability of knowledge.
4. Acceptable Because it Is Defended in a Reasonable Sub-Argument
E.g., Aquinas' cosmological argument; More sea ice; Death penalty p. 203
5. Acceptable on the Authority of the Arguer or an Expert
E.g., if the arguer is an authority/expert on a topic.
E.g., if the arguer cites an expert on a topic.
Exercises: Do 8B a, b, c
Conditions of Unacceptability (besides failing general rules 1 or 2)
1. Internal Inconsistency
(a) E.g., Donald Trump on climate change.
(b) E.g., (P1) Only claims that can be verified by 3rd parties can be trusted.
(P2) Hundreds of people have claimed to have been abducted by aliens.
(C) Therefore, alien abductions are really happening.
(c) E.g., The US Government is one of the most incompetent institutions anywhere on earth--especially under G. W. Bush. 9-11 was a top-secret government co-ordinated false flag operation to take away our civil liberties.
(d) E.g., From facebook:
Post: After 8 years of trying to convince my father to stop taking his statins (cholesterol lowering medications he was prescribed by his GP), he's finally done his own investigation, and, after examining the evidence, has decided to stop taking them.
http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/01/06/stop-statins/
Commenter: I wish I could convince my dad that dr are people too an not experts on everything!!
Poster: Brenda-- if he's on statins, please show him this amazing documentary that interviews experts in the field that actually go over the data
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/05/gop-bombshell-an-evil-mastermind-behind-most-elaborate-cover-up-in-us-history.html
Warning! Don't confuse internal inconsistency with tu quoque.
2. Begging the Question
(a) E.g.,
(P1) Alice says she is honest.
(P2) If an honest person says something, it must be true.
(C) Therefore Alice is an honest person, because an honest person says so.
(b) E.g., p. 206 Good Reasoning Matters
How do we know the bible is the right criterion of truth? All through the scriptures are found...expressions such as Thus says the Lord," "The Lord said," and "God spoke." Statements like "Thus says the Lord" occur no less than 1, 904 times in the 39 books of the Old Testament.
(c) E.g., (From Russell's Problems of Philosophy)
(P1) Other people besides myself report seeing a table.
(C) Therefore, the table exists as a physical object, not just an idea in my mind.
(MC) Therefore, there are physical objects and a mind-independent reality.
(d) "It's morally permissible to eat animals because we are humans and they are animals."
(e) "Gay marriage is wrong because it goes against tradition."
3. Problems with Language (Vagueness)
E.g., "I've never been really sick."
E.g., "I don't drink regularly."
E.g., "I've never had any major problems with my vehicle."
E.g., "Prostitution is a violation of human dignity."
Exercises: 8C a, b, c
How to Skeptic
John Oliver on Miss. America and Scholarships
1. Of every major premise, fact check and, for politically controversial facts, be sure to check several sources. I suggest beginning with wikipedia for scientific and conspiracy claims or any topic where there will be expert opinion. You may use blogs be judicious. Thoroughly check the credentials of the blogger (see: Arguments from Authority).
2. Be cautious of partisan websites posing as impartial. Always try to find out where they get their funding. You may use partisan websites, but do not accept any statements that aren't supported by a citation. Be alert for the fallacy of confirming instances. Cut and paste the source of the data (i.e., any study that is cited to support a premise/evidence) in your browser and at least read the abstract to check for slanting by omission.
3. For "too-good-to-be-true" health and/or conspiracy claims, type in the claim followed by "debunk." Be careful because some snakeoil websites are figuring out this strategy and are including "debunk" in their search terms for the article. It's a war zone out there! Be sure to secure your tinfoil hat to your head!
Study: Experts vs Online Consumers Evaluation of Website Credibility
Examples
1. E.g., Cantor, Feb. 4: The CBO’s latest report confirms what Republicans have been saying for years now.
Under Obamacare, millions of hardworking Americans will lose their jobs and those who keep them will see their hours and wages reduced.
2. E.g. Obama:"What is and isn't a Schedule I narcotic is a job for Congress."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/feb/04/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-its-congress-change-how-feds-cla/
3. Natural News vs Mercola vs Sciencebasedmedicine
Homework 3B for CSN and UNLV Class
From the text book do
Ex 8A 1-6
Ex 8B a-g
No comments:
Post a Comment