DOC PREVIEW
UofL PHIL 211 - Chapter 6 notes

This preview shows page 1 out of 2 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 2 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 2 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Chapter 6 notesFallacies of Insufficient EvidenceInappropriate Appeal to Authority- Occurs when an arguer cites an authority, who, there is good reason to believe, is unreliable1. Are they an authority/expert?2. Are they biased?3. Are they citing their sources correctly?Appeal to ignorance- When someone claims that, the failure to prove something false, entails that is it trueEX: there must not be intelligent life on other planets. We never found any.False Alternatives- Insisting that there are less choices than there actually are - Are in the form of “either/or” but can also present multiple options- Can also be in the form of “if/then” Loaded Question- Question that contains a presupposition such that, either way you answer it, you will appear to endorse that assumption Examples:1. Have you stopped cheating on your exams?2. Where did you hide the bodies?3. Are you still in favor of this fiscally irresponsible bill?Questionable Cause- Occurs when one claims, without sufficient evidence, that one thing is the cause of something elseThe post hoc fallacy: suggesting that A causes B just because A came before B.Mere correlation fallacy: suggesting that the constant conjunction of A and B entails that they are casually related.Oversimplified cause fallacy: suggesting that A is the cause of B when clearly B has many causes.EX: SAT scores have been dropping. Kida have been watching too much TVSlippery Slope- When one claims, without sufficient evidence, that a seemingly harmless action will lead to a terrible one.Common form: A leads to B, and B leads to C, and C to do D, and we really don’t want D. Thus, we shouldn’t do A. Weak Analogy- Occurs when an arguer compares two or more things that aren’t really comparable in the relevant respectEX: lettuce is leafy and green and good on burgers. Poison ivy is leafy and green. It would be good on burgers tooInconsistency- Committed when an arguer espouses two logically contradictory claimsEX: nobody goes there anymore; its too crowdedCommon formA, and not


View Full Document

UofL PHIL 211 - Chapter 6 notes

Download Chapter 6 notes
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Chapter 6 notes and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Chapter 6 notes 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?