Please note that some of the items on this post are clickable to further your knowledge on a particular issue/idea/theory.
Goals of this chapter:
1). Distinguish between deductive and inductive arguments.
2). Identify the characteristics of an inductive argument.
3). Learn how to recognize and evaluate arguments based on generalization.
4). Examine polling and sampling methods.
5). Study the various uses of analogies.
6). Learn how to recognize and evaluate arguments using analogies.
7). Learn how to recognize and evaluate a causal argument.
8). Distinguish between a correlation and a causal relationship.
*Inductive arguments claim that their conclusion probably follows from the premises. Because of this, inductive arguments are merely stronger or weaker rather than true or false.
*In determining if an argument is inductive, look for certain words that suggestion that the conclusion probably, rather than necessarily, follows from the premise (s). These include words and phrases such as probably, most likely, chances are that, it is reasonable to suppose that, we can expect that, and it seems probably that.
*Not all inductive arguments contain indicator words. In these cases, you have to ask yourself if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. If the conclusion is only likely, then it is probably an inductive argument.
*Remember from Chapter 8, Deductive Argument:
*A deductive argument claims that its conclusion necessarily follows the premises.
*Certain words and phrases are commonly used in deductive arguments; these include certainly, absolutely, definitely, conclusively, must be, and it necessarily follows that. However, not all deductive arguments contain indicator words.
NOTE: We use inductive arguments just about every day when we extend what we already know to situations that are not as familiar to us. See page 203 for further discussion about Inductive Reasoning in Everyday life.
There are some very important ideas covered starting on page 204. Here are some of the ideas:
1). Generalization: We use generalization when we draw a conclusion about a certain characteristic of a group of population on the basis of a sample from that group.
2). Polls: These are a type of survey that involves collecting opinions or information on a subject from a sample group of people for the purpose of analysis.
3). Sampling: This entails selecting only some members of a class or group and then making a generalization about the whole population that is based on the characteristics of these members.
4). Representative Sample: A sample that is on that is similar in respects to the larger population from which it was drawn.
5). Random Sampling: Every member has an equal chance of becoming part of the sample.
6). Self-Selected Sample: A sample where only the people most interested in the poll of survey participate.
Moving onto page 207, there are some interesting ideas that are covered.
1). Slanted Question: A question that is written to elicit a particular response.
2). Push Polls: A poll that starts by presenting the pollsters' views before asking a response.
3). Loaded Question: A fallacy that assumes a particular answer to another unasked question.
NOTE: You will see the above 9 principles used quite a bit during an election year. Or should I say, the two years prior to an election year. It almost feels like the Holiday Season when Christmas decorations come out earlier and earlier every year. The presidential election (or should I call it a 'battle') seems to start earlier and earlier during every election. You can impress your friends and family by knowing these concepts really well......and hey, you'll get a double bonus for knowing these ideas, because you'll likely see them on a test at some point this semester. :)
Page 209-210 cover the idea of applying Generalizations to Particular Cases. Don't skip this section - it will apply all of the above concepts, and expand your understanding of how these ideas are applied.
Moving onto page 211, the book covers the idea of Evaluating Inductive Arguments Using Generalization. "Like all inductive arguments, generalizations are neither true nor false; they are merely stronger or weaker arguments." Here are the ideas that follow:
1). The Premises Are True: True premises are based on credible evidence.
2). The Sample Is Large Enough: As a general rule, the larger the sample, the more reliable the conclusion.
3). A Sample is Representative: A sample should be representative of the population being studied.
4). The Sample if Current and Up-to-Date: A sample may be unrepresentative because it is outdated.
5). The Conclusion is Supported by the Premises: The conclusion should follow logically from the premises.
Page 214 builds even further on these ideas, and starts a discussion about analogies.
*An analogy is based on a comparison between two or more things or events.
*Metaphor, a type of descriptive analogy, are frequently found in literature. (Uses of Analogies)
Arguments Based on Analogies is the next section:
Example: Premise: X (which is familiar) has characteristics a, b, and c.
Premise: Y (which is not as familiar) has characteristics a and b.
Conclusion: Therefore, Y probably also has characteristic c.
Argument from Design: The argument from design begins by noting the similarities between the universe and other natural objects (such as the human eye) and human-made objects (such as the watch). Both natural and human-made objects share characteristics of both (1) organization and (2) purposefulness. The organization and the purposefulness of a watch are the direct result of an intelligent, rational creator - a watchmaker.
Example:
Premise: A watch has the following characteristics: (1) organization, (2) purposefulness, and (3) having an intelligent, rational creator.
Premise: The universe (or human eye) also demonstrates characteristics (1) organization and (2) purposefulness.
Conclusion: Therefore, by analogy, the universe (or human eye) also has (3) an intelligent, rational creator, and that creator is God.
Evaluating Inductive Arguments Based on Analogies:
2). List the Similarities.
3). List the Dissimilarities.
4). Compare the lists of similarities and differences.
5). Examine the possible counteranalogies.
6). Determine if the analogy supports the conclusion.
Page 220 covers Causal Arguments.
*A cause is an event that brings about a change or effect.
*A causal argument: An argument that claims something is or is not the cause of something else.
Pg. 220, "The tern cause in the commonly used premise indicator because is a sign of the importance of cause-and-effect relationship in arguments. Many of our everyday decisions rely on this type of inductive reasoning. If we are to have any level of control over our lives, we need to have some understanding of cause-and-effect relations".
*Correlation: When two events occur together regularly at rates higher than probability.
*Positive Correlation: The incidence of one event increases when the second one increases.
*Negative Correlation: When the occurrence of one event increases as the other decreases.
*Controlled Experiment: An experiment in which the sample is randomly divided into an experimental and a control group.
*Cost-Benefit Analysis: A process where the harmful effects of an action are weighed against the benefits.
Evaluating Causal Arguments (page 224).
1). Determine whether the evidence for a causal relationships is strong.
2). Make sure that the argument does not contain a fallacy.
3). Decide whether the data are current and up-to-date.
4). Make sure that the conclusion does not go beyond the premises.
Make sure that you thoroughly know these concepts, and how to apply them. There will be application questions on tests, including the midterm and final exam.
Email me if you need further clarification on any of these ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment