Review Chapter 7 Flashcards Preview

Philosophy > Review Chapter 7 > Flashcards

Flashcards in Review Chapter 7 Deck (23)
Loading flashcards...
1

What is the traditional term to describe an argument with an irrelevant premise?

Non-Sequitur

2

How would you define an appeal to pity?

a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent's feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion

3

When does an appeal to force arise?

When the premise of an argument threatens the use of force (either physical force or other kinds of pressure, such as economic pressure or emotional black mail) as a reason for accepting the conclusion.

4

When does appeal to popularity arise?

When an argument uses the popularity of a belief as a reason for holding that the belief is true, when its popularity is irrelevant to its truth or falsity.

5

What is appeal to authority?

Argument from authority, also ad verecundiam and appeal to authority, is a common form of argument which leads to a logical fallacy. In informal reasoning, the appeal to authority is a form of argument attempting to establish a statistical syllogism.

6

Is all appeals to authority irrelevant?

NO
Consider Why someone might consult a doctor, lawyer, architect or engineer

7

The statement below is what type of fallacy?
Albert Einstein, even after all his research into the nature of the universe, still believed in God. He once wrote, “I do not believe that the universe was the result of blind chance.” If belief in God made sense to Einstein, then it makes sense to me.

Appeal to Authority

8

How is the fallacy of Ad Hominem Committed?

This is committed when an argument substitutes irrelevant personal or circumstantial information discrediting the author of a statement for genuine evidence that the statement is false.

9

When does Tu Quoque aries?

Typically in an argumentative context when someone attempts to refute or rebut something said by another person

10

The statement below is an example of what fallacy?

Wilma: You cheated on your income tax. Don’t you realize that’s wrong? Walter: Hey, wait a minute. You cheated on your income tax last year. Or have you forgotten about that?

Tu Quoque

11

How does someone commit the straw man fallacy?

This is committed when someone attacks a position that appears similar to, but is actually different from, an opponents position and concludes that the opponents real position has thereby been the one refuted.

12

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

i wouldn’t take his word for anything, if i were you. his father has been convicted for fraud, and you know what they say: like father, like son.

There is no direct reason to think that the fact that someone’s father has been convicted for fraud means that the person is completely untrustworthy. The premise is thus irrelevant. This is similar to an ad hominem, although it is the personal qualities of the speaker’s father that are being attacked rather than those of the speaker. alternatively, we could read Like father like son as a second premise. This might make the first premise relevant, but it’s often not true.

13

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

NCIS is the best show on television. it must be the best because it gets higher ratings than any other show.

Unless one is prepared to argue that the popularity of a television show is a good indicator of the quality of the show, this argument commits an irrelevant appeal to popularity.

14

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

Many mathematicians used to believe that formal logic could provide a foundation for the whole of mathematics. But they were wrong. Their view was decisively refuted by kurt gödel in his famous paper published in 1931.

This is a legitimate appeal to authority, at least if presented by someone who knows who gödel is and knows he meets the criteria for a reliable authority. if you did not know that gödel meets these criteria, you should refuse to accept the appeal until you have reason to believe that the criteria are satisfied.

15

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

how can anyone seriously believe in evolution? i certainly don’t. how can you take seriously a theory that claims that humans are just monkeys with less hair and that our ancestors were apes?

This argument commits the straw man fallacy. Evolutionary theory does not claim that humans are just monkeys with less hair or that our ancestors were apes.

16

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

i’m fed up with the feminist movement. i used to think they had some valid concerns, but they are just another special-interest group who are upset because they aren’t getting all the good jobs. They talk a lot about justice but it all comes down to selfishness.

This argument commits the ad hominem fallacy. it attacks the views of feminists on the ground that feminists are selfish. it also commits the straw man fallacy, since feminists are characterized in a false way, that is, as a group that is seeking all the good jobs for women.

17

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

Throughout recorded history, the family unit has always had a single head, usually the father, but sometimes the mother or a grandparent. But in recent years this tradition has been challenged by those who think that the mother and father can be equal partners. Do these people really think that their limited perspective is better than the wisdom of history? The idea is preposterous.

This argument appeals to the wisdom of history as the reason for condemning the view that mothers and fathers can be equal partners as head of the family unit. history is thus treated as a kind of authority on how the family should be organized. This is clearly an irrelevant appeal.

18

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

I hate flying, and I don’t see why everyone thinks I’m just being silly. Look at Janine. She hates flying as much as I do.

This is an example of the kind of irrelevant things we say when we are pressed to defend an irrational position. Obviously, the fact that Janine hates flying has nothing to do with whether or not the speaker is being silly.

19

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

My son wants to be an opera singer, but he’ll have to do it without any support from me. i’ve tried to persuade him to go into something useful, like business or law, but he insists on being a singer. he seems to think that everybody should be free to do whatever they want in life. Well, where would we be if everybody did whatever they wanted? That’s what i said to him when he told me he wanted to study music at university. and his only response was to walk out of the room.

This argument probably commits the straw man fallacy, since it is unlikely that the son actually believes, as his father claims he does, that everybody should be free to do whatever they want in life. Perhaps the son actually said what his father attributes to him, but in this case the father has violated the principle of charity, since the son probably meant something much more reasonable, namely, that everybody should be free to seek whatever career they want. The father’s attempted rebuttal, of course, is relevant only against the unreasonable interpretation of the son’s beliefs.

20

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

(Background: two neighbors are talking to each other over the back fence in a suburban neighborhood.) Ed: Your party last night was very loud and kept us awake until 2 am. really, you must be more considerate towards the people around you, especially late at night when your noise is so unpleasant. ralph: Don’t be so self-righteous, Ed. i can’t count the number of times i’ve heard your dog barking late at night.

ralph commits the fallacy of tu quoque. rather than respond to Ed’s complaint, Ralph deflects responsibility for the noise he is responsible for by noting that Ed is responsible for late night noise too. his complaint about Ed’s dog may be justifiable, but voiced at this time, without responding to Ed’s complaint, it is fallacious.

21

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

For years Spanish-speaking workers have had to put up with an economy that was dominated by anglophones (English speakers). Often they could not get equal pay for the same jobs, and usually could never get a promotion, unless they spoke good English. now that in some cities more people speak Spanish than English we should make Spanish the official language. let the English speakers suffer for a change.

This argument is the tu quoque fallacy, since it argues that the fact that anglophones treated Spanish speakers unfairly in the past is a good reason for Spanish speakers to treat anglophones unfairly in the present. The only way to avoid the tu quoque charge here would be to argue that revenge of this sort is morally justified.

22

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

For years Spanish-speaking workers have had to put up with an economy that was dominated by anglophones (English speakers). Often they could not get equal pay for the same jobs, and usually could never get a promotion, unless they spoke good English. now that in some cities more people speak Spanish than English we should make Spanish the official language. let the English speakers suffer for a change.

This argument is a blatant ad hominem. There is not even a pretence that the schoolteacher’s charges against the principal have been investigated and found to be invalid on the basis of relevant evidence.

23

Explain the weakness in the argument below (if any)

(Background: a Senator responding to complaints that the stimulus package has done little to cut the rate of job loss.) naturally, i would expect this member of the opposing party to complain about these things. She objected to the program when it was first proposed, argued against it both on the floor of the Senate, and in the media, and voted against it when it was passed in the legislature. She just won’t accept that this is a valuable thing.

This argument is both ad hominem and question begging. it is ad hominem because the Senator implies that the opposing party member’s objection to the new program is the result of her own stubbornness rather than the government’s management of the program. at the same time, it is question begging, instead of defending the stimulus program on any matters of substance or responding to the opponents objections, it merely asserts that the program is valuable.