20081202

From The Foundation for Critical Thinking

The Thinker's Guide to Fallacies: The Art of Mental Trickery and Manipulation

By Dr. Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder

"Most people deeply believe in -- but are unaware of -- the following premises:

1. It's true if I believe it
2. It's true if we believe it
3. It's true if I want to believe it
4. It's true if it serves my vested interest to believe it"

From http://www.criticalthinking.org/

  • 44 Foul Ways to Win an Argument (which include the following):
    • Appeal to Authority
    • Appeal to Experience
    • Appeal to Fear
    • Appeal to Popular Passions
    • Appeal to Tradition or Faith ("the tried & true")
    • Assume a Posture of Righteousness
    • Attack the person (and not the argument)
    • Beg the Question
    • Call For Perfection (demand impossible conditions)
    • Create a False Dilemma (the great either/or)
    • Question Your Opponent's Conclusions
    • Create Misgivings: Where There's Smoke, There's Fire
    • Create A Straw Man
    • Deny or Defend Your Inconsistencies
    • Demonize His Side Sanitize Yours
    • Evade Questions, Gracefully
    • Flatter Your Audience
    • Hedge What You Say
    • Ignore the Evidence
    • Ignore the Main Point
    • Attack Evidence (that undermines your case)
    • Insist Loudly on a Minor Point
    • Make Much of Any Inconsistencies in Your Opponent's Position
    • Make Your Opponent Look Ridiculous
    • Oversimplify the Issue

  • 20081201

    F A L L A C I E S

    F A L L A C I E S

    Fallacies of Distraction
    Fallacies of Distraction involve the misuse of logical operators--or, not, if-then, and--which distract the reader away from realizing an apparent falsity within the text. Each of the following examples contains links to web pages that further elaborate their meaning.


    False Dilemma (misuse of "or")
    Argument from Ignorance (misuse of "not")
    Slippery Slope (misuse of "if-then")
    Complex Question (misuse of "and")

    Appeals to Motives in Place of Support
    The fallacies in this category are without reasons for belief and tend to appeal to the emotions or other psychological factors of their readers.

    Appeal to Force
    Appeal to Pity
    Appeal to Consequences
    Prejudicial Language
    Appeal to Popularity

    Changing the Subject
    The fallacies in this category target the person making the argument rather than the issue being argued.

    Attacking the Person
    Appeal to Authority
    Anonymous Authorities
    Style over Substance.

    Inductive Fallacies
    The fallacies in this category are assumptions about a whole from properties of a part. Although statistical sampling is a means of reasoning the composition of a whole, no sample is a perfect representation of its whole.

    Hasty Generalization
    Unrepresentative Sample
    False Analogy
    Slothful Induction
    Fallacy of Exclusion

    Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms
    The fallacies in this category are assumptions about a part or even a whole that are made from statistical syllogisms, such as "most," as in "Most teachers know how to teach," or "generally," as in "Students are generally good learners." However, no syllogism is actually necessary to engage in this fallacy. For example, "People like to get haircuts."

    Accident
    Converse Accident.


    Causal Fallacies
    The fallacies in this category are assumptions about conclusions that are based on their causes. In other words, we can make a mistake in assumming that if cause A occurs, conclusion B will occur also--such as if students are handed textbooks, then they will read them.

    Post Hoc
    Joint Effect
    Insignificant
    Wrong Direction
    Complex Cause

    Missing the Point
    The fallacies in this category are false assumptions that fail to prove that a conclusion is true.

    Begging the Question
    Irrelevant Conclusion
    Straw Man

    Fallacies of Ambiguity
    The fallacies in this category involve using a word or phrase unclearly (ambiguously or vaguely).

    Equivocation (Using the same term in two different ways)
    Amphiboly (Two different interpretations)
    Accent (what is actually said isn't what is actually meant)

    Category Errors
    The fallacies in this category occur when one thinks the sum of all the parts fits into a gestalt.

    Composition (The whole does not necessarily have the properties of its parts)
    Division (The parts do not necessarily have the properties of the whole)

    Non-Sequitur
    The fallacies in this category occur as a result of invalid arguments.

    Affirming the Consequent
    Denying the Antecedent
    Inconsistency

    Syllogistic Fallacies
    The fallacies in this category occur as a result of invalid categorical syllogisms.

    Fallacy of Four Terms: a syllogism has four terms
    Undistributed Middle
    Illicit Major
    Illicit Minor
    Fallacy of Exclusive Premises: a syllogism has two negative premises
    Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise
    Existential Fallacy: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises

    Fallacies of Explanation
    The fallacies in this category refer to errors in making explanations.

    Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist)
    Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
    Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested)
    Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
    Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)

    Fallacies of Definition
    The fallacies in this category refer to errors in defining words or concepts.

    Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included)
    Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
    Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand)
    Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
    Conflicting Conditions (The definition is self-contradictory)
    Fallacies of Faulty Reasoning
    false analogy
    compares two things that are not alike in significant respects or have critical points of difference
    hasty generalization
    draws a conclusion about a class based on too few or atypical examples
    false cause
    post hoc
    mistakes temporal succession for causal sequence
    single cause fallacies
    occurs when an advocate attributes only one cause to a complex problem
    slippery slope
    assumes, without evidence, that a given event is the first in a series of steps that will lead inevitably to some outcome.

    TFY C12 Web Links

    ARGUMENTS AND INFERENCES
    Tie together what you have learned about inferences and argument by reading this article taken from Philosophy Pages.
    http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e01.htm

    DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
    Explain how this document represents a deductive argument.
    http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

    DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE
    These exercises help you understand the differences between inductive and deductive reasoning. Prepared by San Jose University, Mission Critical.http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/7/part2/ind-ded.html

    MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.Here is a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr.
    http://nobelprize.org/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html

    THOMAS JEFFERSON
    Review the life and writings of Thomas Jefferson.
    http://www.pbs.org/jefferson/

    VALID AND INVALID
    Learn more about valid and invalid deductive reasoning prepared by the Rhodes Writing Center.
    http://www.rhodes.edu/writingcenter/group_b/deductive_reasoning.html

    VENN DIAGRAMS
    Past editions of this text have included Venn diagrams: a useful visual approach to logic.
    http://www.wadsworth.com/cgi-wadsworth/course_products_wp.pl?fid=M42&product_isbn_issn=141301772X&chapter_number=12&altname=Web+Links&resource_id=5##

    20080908

    Reading Exercise: Sehtolc Gnihsaw

    Reading Exercise: Sehtolc Gnihsaw

    The procedure is actually quite simple. First, you arrange the items into different groups. Of course one pile may be sufficient depending on how much there is to do. If you have to go somewhere else due to lack of facilities that is the next step; otherwise, you are pretty well set. It is important not to overdo things. That is, it is better to do too few things at once than too many. In the short run this may not seem important but complications can easily arise. A mistake can be expensive as well. At first, the whole procedure will seem complicated. Soon, however, it will become just another facet of life. It is difficult to foresee any end to the necessity for this task in the immediate future, but then, one never can tell. After the procedure is completed one arranges the materials into different groups again. Then they can be put into their appropriate places. Eventually they will be used once more and the whole cycle will then have to be repeated. However, that is part of life.

    20080819

    Syllabus


    ENGLISH 75 CRITICAL THINKING
    Prerequisite/Co-requisite Courses: None
    Fall 2008 (3), Tuesdays, 9-10:15, 10:30-11:45
    Instructor: Dr. Sylvia Y. R. Schoemaker
    Phone: 510.628.8036
    Office Hours: T-Th 11:45-12:30 and by arrangement
    E-mail:
    profs4e@gmail.com

    Blog: http://e75cthink.blogspot.com/

    Wiki: http://e75cthink.wetpaint.com/

    DESCRIPTION

    ENG 75- CRITICAL THINKING

    Critical thinking (E75) considers the cognitive skills and communicative strategies for defining, applying, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating information. The course includes structural and operational approaches to task/mission analysis, decision-making, change forecasting, adaptation, and evaluation. Systems approach to analysis and solution of complex problems. Conceptual issues in problem definition, goal determination and measurement of effectiveness. (3 units)

    OBJECTIVES

    Students will develop their cognitive skills and enhance their communicative strategies for defining, applying, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating information. The course will incorporate the following University learner and institutional goals:

    University learner goals 1 -6, and specifically (3.2) To examine objectively various sides of issues; (3.3) To utilize the procedures involved in systematic problem solving; and in English:: To develop basic academic and professional skills(1); To develop the ability to communicate effectively in English, oral and in writing, and to read with understanding (1.1) and institutional goals , especially 1,(1.1-1.4), 2.4

    FORMAT

    The course sessions will include presentation, discussion, and application modes.

    STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES

    Students are expected to attend class, complete assignments, and to participate in individual and group work in a productive manner, and to take personal responsibility for meeting the objectives of the course.

    REQUIRED TEXTS:

    Mayfield, M. (2007). Thinking for yourself. (7th Ed.). Boston: Thomson Wadsworth. ISBN: 1-4130-1772-X (TFY)

    Daiek, D., & Anter, N.(2004) Critical reading for college and beyond. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 0072473762 (CRCB)

    RECOMMENDED TEXT:

    Harris, Robert. A. Creative Problem Solving. Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing, 2002. ISBN: 1-884585-43-4 (CPS)

    COMPANION SITE FOR REQUIRED TEXTS

    Thinking for Yourself Site

    Critical Reading for College and Beyond Companion site:


    ASSIGNMENTS

    Topical Outline

    Topics covered include observation skills, appropriate language skills and encoding strategies, differentiating among fact, inference, judgment, recognizing fallacies of reasoning and evaluation, understanding viewpoint, analyzing character, logic, and emotion in persuasion.

    SCHEDULE

    Wk

    Date

    Notes


    TFY Chapter


    CRCB Chapter

    1

    2-Sep


    Observation

    1

    Reading

    1

    2

    9-Sep


    Word Precision

    2

    Vocabulary

    2

    3

    16-Sep


    Facts

    3

    Memory

    3

    4

    23-Sep


    Inferences

    4

    Time

    4

    5

    30-Sep


    Assumptions

    5

    Main Ideas

    5

    6

    7-Oct


    Opinions

    6

    Details

    6

    7

    14-Oct


    Evaluations

    7

    Inference

    7

    8

    21-Oct



    ePortfolio due


    Review


    8

    9

    28-Oct

    Midterm

    Midterm


    Strategies

    9

    10

    4-Nov


    Viewpoints

    8

    Marking

    10

    11

    11-Nov

    Holiday

    Argument

    9

    Adv Strategies

    11

    12

    18-Nov


    Fallacies

    10

    Arguments

    12

    13

    25-Nov


    Inductive Reasoning

    11

    Cognitive Domain

    13

    14

    2-Dec


    Deductive Reasoning

    12

    Evaluation

    14

    15

    9-Dec


    Final




    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA & METHOD OF EVALUATING STUDENTS

    Students will demonstrate their level of achievement through appropriate and accurate application of critical thinking theory, including problem-solving, analysis, and decision-making criteria in approaching, solving,, text and classroom exercises , and work on real-world examples, individually and in groups.

    Class Participation

    15%

    Quizzes

    10%

    Projects

    15%

    Term Paper

    30%

    Presentation

    10%

    Final Exam

    20%

    Total

    100%

    100-95

    A

    94-90

    A-

    89-87

    B+

    86-84

    B-

    83-80

    C+

    79-77

    C+

    76-74

    C

    73-70

    C-

    69-67

    D+

    66-64

    D

    63-60

    D-

    59 or <

    F

    20080802

    Welcome

    Welcome to this blog at http://e75cthink.blogspot.com