Download Critical Thinking: Key Concepts and Fallacies and more Exams Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!
1 /
D265 Critical Thinking (STUDY THIS
ONE!)
1. PROPOSITIONS: Are statements that can be true or false
2. NON-PROPOSITONS: Are sentences that are not statements about matters of fact or fiction. They do not make a claim that can be true or false.
3. SIMPLE PROPOSITIONS: Have no internal logic structure, meaning whether they are true or false does not depend on whether a part of them is true or false.
They are simply true or false on their own. (Example: Harry Potter wears glasses. The sky is blue.)
4. COMPLEX PROPOSITIONS: Have internal logic structure, meaning they are composed of simple propo-
sitions. Whether they are true or false depends on whether their parts are true or false. (Example: The sky is blue, but it does not look blue to me right now. The cat ate the food, but he did not like it. The GDP of Canada is either $3 trillion or $12 trillion.)
5. CONCLUSION INDICATORS: THEREORE, IT FOLLOWS THAT, AS A RESULT, THUS, & CONSEQUENTLY.
Acronym to remember: ACT IT As a result Consequently Therefore It follows that Thus
6. PREMISE INDICATORS: BECAUSE, FOR, GIVEN THAT, AS, SINCE, AS INDICATED BY & WHEREAS.
2 / Acronym to remember: FAB SWAG For As Because Since Whereas As indicated by Given that
7. DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS: Arguments where the premises guarantee or necessitate the conclusion.
-mathematical arguments, logical arguments, arguments from definition.
8. INDUCTION ARGUMENTS: Arguments where the premises make the conclusion probable.
-analogies, authority, causal inferences, extrapolations, etc.
9. INFERENCE TO THE BEST EXPLANATION OR ABDUCTION: Arguments where the best available explanation is chosen as the
correct explanation.
10. FORMAL FALLACY: Concerns the structure of an argument
11. INFORMAL FALLACY: Concerns the informational content of an argument
12. A FORMAL FALLACY IS A TYPE OF: Bad Argument Structure
13. PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY: The principle of charity suggests we should try to understand ideas before criticizing them.
14. CONFIRMATION BIAS: the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.
4 /
23. Anchoring / Adjustment bias: Anchoring bias is a cognitive bias that causes us to rely too heavily
on the first piece of information we are given about a topic. When we are setting plans or making estimates about something, we interpret newer information from the reference point of our anchor, instead of seeing it objectively.
24. selection bias: A polling error in which the sample is not representative of the population being studied, so
that some opinions are over- or underrepresented
25. sound argument: Soundness: An argument is sound if it meets these two criteria: (1) It is valid. (2) Its premises are true.
26. valid argument: A valid argument is an argument in which the conclusion must be true whenever the hypotheses are true. EX: "It rains only if I
carry an umbrella" can be rewritten as "If it rains, then I carry an umbrella." "All citizens of Egypt speak Arabic." can be rewritten as "If someone is a citizen of Egypt, then they speak Arabic."
27. unsound argument: An unsound argument is either an invalid argument or a valid argument with at least
one false premise. EX: All dogs are mammals. Therefore, dogs are cows. The above argument contains true premises, but it is invalid since the conclusion doesn't logically follow from the premises. Therefore, it is also an unsound argument.
28. strong argument: A strong argument is a non-deductive argument that succeeds in providing probable,
but not conclusive, logical support for its conclusion.
29. cogent argument: A cogent argument is an inductive argument that is both strong and all of its premises are true.
30. uncogent argument: An uncogent argument is an inductive argument that is either weak or has at least one false premise.
31. Denying the Antecedent: If A then B Not A
Therefore, not B = INVALID Example: If I'm in Rome (A), Then I'm in Italy (B). I'm not in in Rome (A).
5 / Therefore I am not in Italy (B). =INVALID
32. Affirming the Consequent: is a logical fallacy that involves taking a true statement and assuming the converse form would be true as well.
Formally, we can represent this fallacy as follows: If X is the case, then Y is also the case. Y is true, so X must be true as well.
33. cognitive bias: When our brains take a quick way of making decisions or understanding things, but that
quick way can lead to errors in judgment.
34. availability: estimating the likelihood of events based on their availability in memory; if instances come readily to mind (perhaps because of their
vividness), we presume such events are common EX: two girls saw a plane crash on the news and cancel their flight presuming they will meet the same fate.
35. Principle of Charity: we should choose the reconstructed argument that gives the benefit of the doubt to
the person presenting the argument
36. the fallacy fallacy: assumes that if an argument contains a logical fallacy, then its conclusion must be false.
37. Inference: A conclusion one can draw from the presented details. EX: "if there is a storm, then the oflce is closed." means "if the oflce is closed, then I
don't go to work."
38. weak argument: a non-deductive argument that fails to provide probable support for its conclusion.
39. Representativeness Bias: A faulty heuristic strategy based on the presumption that once people or events are categorized, they share all the
features of other members in that category.
40. Alief: An automatic belief-like attitude that can explain how our instinctual responses can conflict with our reasoned-out beliefs.
41. Ad Hominem Fallacy (Fallacy of Relevance): someone attacks the arguer instead of the argument.
("Attacks the Homie")
42. Genetic Fallacy (Fallacy of Relevance): arguer critiques the origin of a claim or argument rather than the claim or argument itself. NOT
7 /
2 My cousin saw someone take on the characteristics, personality, and voice of a spirit during a ceremony.
3 My cousin told me that she saw this last week.
56. Mapping Independent Support: (1) This test is easy.
(2) Linda got an A on the test and
(3) Maise got an A on the test and
(4) Francisco got an A on the test.
57. Mapping Conjoint Support: (1) You are behaving unfairly.
(2) You are giving more to some than to others and
(3) giving more to some than to others is not fair.
58. Conjoint Example: (1) Government mandates for zero-emission vehicles won't work because
(2) only electric cars qualify as zero-emission vehicles, and
(3) electric cars won't sell.
(4) They are too expensive,
(5) their range of operation is too limited, and (6) recharging facilities are not generally available.
59. Using Downward Braces: (1) The president may have their faults, but
(2) they are an outstanding leader and(3) we should re-elect them.
8 /
(4) Their foreign policy has brought about respite from violence in various war torn regions as
(5) They sent in troops to protect refugees in Rwanda and
(6) They negotiated an armistice between two middle eastern countries.
(7) Their economic policy has also been largely successful in that
(8) a potential recession has been avoided for now.
(9) They are also a great moral leader as
(10) Theirs is a model family and
(11) They demonstrate true integrity daily.
60. 3-layer Argument: 3-layer
61. begging the question: the premise and the conclusion are the same, only worded ditterently.
62. Modus Ponens: If A, then B A
is true Therefore, B is true = VALID Example: If I'm in Rome (A), then I'm in Italy (B). I am in Rome (A). Therefore I am in Italy (B).
63. Modus Tollens: If A, then B. B
is not the case.
10 / true?: If the answer is "yes," then the argument is sound. If the answer is "no," then the argument is unsound. you will focus on the content (words) of the argument. To do this, add the word "is" to each premise.
70. For inductive arguments, ASK: IS premise one and premise two actually true?: If the answer is "yes," then the
argument is cogent. If the answer is "no," then the argument is uncogent.
71. Arguments about the future
tense tend to be arguments.: Inductive
72. If/Then statements, also known as "conditional
arguments" or hypothetical syllogisms are always almost arguments.: Deductive
73. If an argument is invalid, then it is also
.: Unsound
74. If an argument is weak, then it is also .:
Uncogent
