PHIL-447N Week 6 Discussion Question 1 – Inductive Reasoning - Graded An A

Document Content and Description Below

Discuss some of the differences between causal arguments and both inductive generalizations and analogous arguments. Also discuss the difference between making a causal argument and establishing true ... causation, if there is any. Can you provide an example? In translating casual arguments help with identifying both the resulting and the precipitating events, key elements for determining the strength of the argument. (Jackson 2016) Ex: I seen the young woman texting and driving (precipitating event), She was not paying attention (precipitating event). That is why she rear-ended the car in front of her (Resulting event). Inductive generalizations are based on a sample of a larger group. As a rule, the larger the sample is, the stronger the argument is. This is because larger samples tend to be more representative of the target. . (Jackson 2016) Ex: The weather forecaster on Fox 5 is accurate (target), 80% of the people who watched this channels weather agreed with this statement.(sample). Analyzing analogous arguments is a comparison of two or more things. One of the analogues is called the source, and the other is called the target and last is feature, which is included in source. (Jackson 2016) Ex: I saved a lot of money in long run purchasing my MacBook air(Target) computer. I have had several window pc’s(sample) that have stopped working after a year or two. I have had this computer since 2010 with not one issue(feature). References: (2016). Critical Thinking: A User's Manual, 2nd Edition. [Bookshelf Online]. Retrieved from https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781337512800 Professor/Class Whenever a referenced authority is not an authority on the subject in question, the argument commits the fallacy of appeal to illegitimate authority. The use of illegitimate authorities is notoriously prevalent in advertising. Famous athletes, musicians, and other celebrities regularly endorse products and political campaigns about which they have no expert knowledge. (Jackson 2016) When thinking about the fallacies in the textbook, I have committed the fallacy the appeal to illegitimate authority. Ex: The singer /lyricist Jill Scott lost 50 lbs in a month drinking that skinny tea; I should try it for same result. I understand that just because she is a celebrity does no make this claim about the tea anymore true. As it states in the book this technique is used rather frequently to increase exposure and/or revenue of products. Evaluating the truth in this claim, I would need to locate a more creditable source. “The credibility of the authority is essential to the argument. If the authority is in fact an expert on the subject in question and is likely to be unbiased, then his or her testimony is credible.”(Jackson 2016) References: (2016). Critical Thinking: A User's Manual, 2nd Edition. [Bookshelf Online]. Retrieved from https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781337512800 When learning about fallacies, it is very common for students to realize just how often they use fallacious thinking unintentionally. Thinking about the fallacies in the textbook, which one do you think you have committed the most? Can you give an example? If you need to go outside this short list, be sure to document your source. [Show More]

Last updated: 11 months ago

Preview 1 out of 4 pages