Philosophy 1100

1
Philosophy 1100
Title Critical Reasoning Instructor Paul
Dickey E-mail Address pdickey2_at_mccneb.edu Website
http//mockingbird.creighton.edu/NCW/dickey.htm
Today Midterm Exam 1 Questions? Student
Presentations Chapter 5-7 Review Midterm Exam
2 Next Week Read Chapter 8, pp. 253- 261,
264-268. Exercises 8-1 8-2
1
2
REVIEW
3
Chapter Five Persuasion Through Rhetoric
4

• Rhetoric tries to persuade through use of the
  emotional power of language and is an art in
  itself.
• Though it can be psychologically influential,
  rhetoric has no logical strength.
• Rhetoric does not make your argument any better,
  even if it convinces everyone.
• Can you recognize rhetoric?

5
Never drive in a storm without wiper blades.
6
Never go into the fierce storms of an argument
without your
WIPER SHIELD to protect you from
the evil forms of rhetoric devices W
easeling, I nnuendo, P roof Surrogates E
xplanations, Analogies Definitions
(Rhetorical) R idicule/Sarcasm S
tereotypes H yperbole I mage Rhetoric E
uphemisms/Dysphemisms L oaded Questions, and D
ownplaying/Minimizing
7
Analogies

• An analogy is a form of reasoning in which one
  thing is inferred to be similar to another thing
  in a certain respect, on the basis of the known
  similarity between the things in other respects.
• An argument from analogy involves the drawing of
  a conclusion about one object or event because
  the same can obviously be said about a similar
  object or event.
• An argument from analogy can be a good inductive
  argument that supports its conclusion.
• The strength of any argument from analogy largely
  depends on the strength and relevance of the
  employed analogy.

8
Rhetorical Deceptions Dirty Tricks

• But a rhetorical analogy attempts to persuade by
  use of a comparison (often clever and humorous)
  without giving us an argument.
• Hilarys eyes are bulgy like a Chihuahua.
• Dick Cheney has steel in his backbone.
• Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.

Video
9
Definitions

• An honest definition attempts to clarify meaning.
  A rhetorical definition uses emotionally tinged
  words to elicit an attitude that is vague (often
  intentionally) and pre-judges the issue.
• Bill Mahers defined a conservative as
• one who thinks all problems can be solved either
  by more guns or more Jesus.
• Abortion is the murder of innocent, unborn
  children.

10
Rhetorical Explanations

• A rhetoric explanation is similarly deceptive and
  attempts to trash a person or idea under a mask
  or pretense of giving an explanation.
• The War in Vietnam was lost because the American
  people lost their nerve.
• Students who drop my classes do so because they
  are idiots.
• Liberals who criticize the U.S. Armys actions in
  Iraq do so only because they are disloyal to
  their country.

11
Weaseling

• Weaseling is a method of hedging a bet. You can
  sometimes spot weaseling by an inappropriate and
  frequent use of qualifiers, such as perhaps,
  possibly, maybe, etc.
• Weaseling protects you from criticism by watering
  down your claim.
• Be careful. qualifiers also are used often to
  carefully say what can legitimately be said about
  an issue and are not weasel words. You need to
  assess the context carefully.

12
Minimizing or Downplaying

• Words and devices that add no argument but only
  suggest that a source or a claim is less
  significant than what the claim or premises
  suggest is called downplaying or minimizing, e.g.
  Are you going to vote for a hockey mom? Or
  just another liberal?
• You can sometimes spot this by a use of words or
  phrases like so-called, merely, mere, or
  just another.
• Downplayers often also make use of stereotypes.

Thats just Dick Cheney
13
Ridicule / Sarcasm

• Ridicule and sarcasm is a powerful rhetorical
  device (often called The Old Horse Laugh
  Fallacy).
• Keep in mind that it adds absolutely nothing to
  the logical force of an argument.
• Questioning the intelligence of the person that
  makes a claim is logically irrelevant to whether
  the claim itself is true or false.

Video
14
Ridicule / Sarcasm

• It is interesting after watching a spirited
  debate (for example, one of political candidates)
  to analyze whether the person who came off more
  humorous or entertaining and the one whom we
  might have thought won the debate actually took
  advantage of his opponent unfairly through this
  method.
• If so, we should re-examine ourselves whether we
  were thinking critically during the debate.

Video
15
Hyperbole

• Hyperbole basically means exaggeration or an
  extravagant overstatement.
• e.g. My boss is a fascist dictator. He wont
  let anybody do things their own way. It is always
  his way or the highway.
• This kind of statement, considered for exactly
  what it says, is silly and lacks credibility.

16
Hyperbole

• Interestingly, hyperbole often works even when no
  one believes it. In this example, we probably
  dont believe the statement is actually true, but
  we would probably be reluctant to take a job
  working for this guy thinking something like
  where theres smoke, there must be fire.
• Be careful As critical thinkers, we have no more
  reason to believe the claim that the boss is a
  problematic one to work for than we do to believe
  the hyperbole.
• BREAKING NEWS!

17
Proof Surrogates

• A proof surrogate is an expression that suggests
  that there is evidence or authority for a claim
  without actually citing such evidence of
  authority.
• e.g. informed sources say, it is obvious
  that or studies show are typical proof
  surrogates.
• Proof surrogates are not substitutes for evidence
  or authority.

18
Proof Surrogates

• The introduction of a proof surrogate does not
  support an argument.
• They may suggest sloppy research or even
  propaganda.
• The use of proof surrogates, on the other hand,
  should not be interpreted that evidence does not
  exist or could not be given. You just dont know.

19
Chapter Six Psychological and Related
Fallacies
19
20
Psychological Related Fallacies

• Logical fallacies pretend to give an argument
  with a premise and conclusion, but the premises
  do not support the conclusion and only evoke
  emotions that make us want to believe or
  satisfy some pre-judgment.
• In most cases, logical fallacies suggest that
  something that is IRRELEVANT should be
  considered.
• There are of course many different kinds of
  logical errors. There are some recurring patterns
  of these that are found so frequently that they
  have been characterized and defined as common
  logical fallacies.
• Thus, a logical fallacy is a particular type of
  logical error that occurs frequently and can be
  understood in terms of general characteristics or
  in the form of the supposed argument.

20
21
The Argument From Outrage

• This fallacy consists of inflammatory words (or
  thoughts) followed by a conclusion of some
  sort. According to our text, it substitutes
  anger for reason or judgment.
• Increasingly on TV, overt anger is being replaced
  with a milder form of argument from outrage,
  substituting a sense of incredulity (with a
  generous mix of facial expressions, etc) for
  overt anger.
• http//www.youtube.com/watch?v2a2-9sPeSoA
• The fallacy involved is basically the same
  suggesting that the other side are fools or
  have a suspicious agenda.

21
22
Emotional Appeals Not Playing Fair

• The group think fallacy occurs when one is
  motivated to accept a claim without argument
  because of membership in a group.
• An example of this is nationalism my country
  right or wrong.
• Ron is not guilty of anything. He is a member in
  good standing of TKE fraternity. He is one of us
  and we support him.

22
23
More Dirty Tricks Not Playing Fair

• The relativist fallacy consists in thinking a
  moral standard of your own group is the right
  way but it doesnt apply to everyone.
• The subjectivist fallacy consists in thinking
  that something is true necessarily because
  someone thinks it is true. It also applies
  whenever objective standards of analysis are
  ignored in favor of suggesting that one can
  believe whatever they like.

23
24
Dont Let em Not Play Fair

• One particular dangerous type of the argument
  from outrage is scape-goating blaming a
  certain group of people or a single person
  (illegal aliens -- notice the dysphemism, Bill
  Clinton, George Bush, President Obama.)
• See Limbaugh quote in the text. (p.184)
• Scape-goating sends us on a witch hunt looking
  for who to blame rather than to determine what
  is reasonable to believe or how to solve the
  problem.

Want more advanced stuff on topic? Click here
24
25
Dont Let em Not Play Fair

• Trying to scare people into doing something or
  accepting a position is using scare tactics.
• Democrats claimed in the last Presidential
  election that George Bush was using 9/11 and
  terrorism as a scare tactic.
• Both Democrats and Republicans claim that the
  other side is using scare tactics on the issue of
  Social Security.

25
26
Dont Let em Not Play Fair

• Many current controversial issues are very prone
  to the use of scare tactics, e.g. same-sex
  marriage, global warming, abortion, failing
  banks, and on and on.
• How can you tell the difference between a scare
  tactic and when a good reason to believe happens
  to be scary?
• Question for the class Was the financial
  crisis last fall used as scare tactics to push
  emergency legislation that would not have
  otherwise passed?

26
27
Emotional Appeals Not Playing Fair

• The argument from pity and the argument from
  envy are also fallacies.
• Whatever feelings one has for a victim of some
  situation or injustice is not in itself an
  argument for a claim although it can well be a
  justification for behavior on our part, including
  increasing our passion to search out and champion
  a logical argument for a position that will
  benefit the individual.

http//www.youtube.com/watch?v06qgaJ2A3Zs
27
28
Emotional Appeals Not Playing Fair

• Apple polishing occurs when an appeal to our
  pride is made by a proponent of a claim.
• Come on, relax. Have a beer. Dont worry about
  your parents. The one thing I like most about you
  is that you think for yourself and dont let your
  parents tell you what to do.
• A guilt trip occurs when an appeal to our shame
  in taking an opposite position is made.

Video
28
29
The Top Ten Fallacies of All Time (according to
your author)
GROPES JAWS
Group Think Red Herring Argument From
Outrage Argument from Popularity Post Hoc, Ergo
Propter Hoc Straw Man Jump to Conclusion Ad
Hominem Argument Wishful Thinking Scare Tactic
29
30
Chapter Seven More Fallacies
30
31
The Genetic Fallacy

• The Genetic Fallacy suggests erroneously that a
  claim is refuted by disputing its origin or
  history.
• e.g. The constitution is a bogus document since
  it was primarily written with the intent to
  protect the property of the wealthy.
• e.g. God does not exist because the whole idea
  of God originated with superstitious people who
  had no knowledge of science or the universe.

Want more advanced stuff on topic? Click here
31
32
The Straw Man or Straw Figure

• The Straw Man Fallacy occurs when a claim is made
  that distorts, exaggerates, or otherwise
  misinterprets an opponents position such that it
  becomes easy to refute.
• e.g. Congressmen who want us to set a timetable
  to leave Iraq are just saying that we should
  surrender.

Important Video
Is this a Straw man Bill Clinton is presenting?
Want more advanced stuff on topic? Click here
32
33
The False Dilemma

• The False Dilemma fallacy occurs when you limit
  considerations to only two alternatives although
  other alternatives may be available.
• e.g. Either we keep all of our current forces in
  Iraq until victory or we just pull out now
  unconditionally and let the terrorists win. It is
  either one or the other, dude.
• e.g. You dont believe in allowing prayer in
  public schools? So what are you an atheist?
• You want this?

OR THIS?
Want more advanced stuff on topic? Click here
33
34
The Perfectionist Fallacy

• A specific type of The False Dilemma is the
  Perfectionist Fallacy which suggests that if a
  policy or a claim is not perfect then it must be
  rejected.
• e.g. If they dont fit, you must acquit.
• Johnny Cochrans defense of O.J. Simpson,
  referring to his purported gloves.
• e. g. The National Football Leagues instant
  replay rule is no good because you are still
  going to still have some bad calls.
• The National Football Leagues instant replay
  rule is no good because they seem to have to make
  adjustments to it every year.

34
35
The Line-Drawing Fallacy

• Another type of The False Dilemma is the
  Line-Drawing Fallacy which suggests that a
  distinction cannot be made because there is no
  precisely known, agreed upon point at which a
  line can be drawn.
• e.g. In the Rodney King case, when exactly did
  the beatings become excessive force?
• e.g. When did Bill Gates become rich? When he
  earned his first dollar? His first 100,000? His
  first 1M? 10M? 1B? Nonetheless, I can assure
  you that Bill Gates is rich.

35