Critical Thinking Lecture 12 Causal Arguments

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
Advertisements

The Subject-Matter of Ethics
Fallacies Related to Cause & Effect
LOGICAL FALLACIES Common Mistakes in Weak Arguments Moore AP Language and Composition.
Introduction to Ethics Lecture 8 Moore’s Non-naturalism
Cognitive Biases 2 Incomplete and Unrepresentative Data.
TODAY’S GOALS Learn advanced strategies for addressing counterarguments Finalize preparations for the class debate.
©2006 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 16 Thinking and Speaking Critically.
Why did this happen? What if?.   Causal argument underlies two of the most common, challenging, and difficult questions we confront in our lives: “Why?”
Chapter 6 Lecture Notes Working on Relevance. Chapter 6 Understanding Relevance: The second condition for cogency for an argument is the (R) condition.
Causation Reasoning about how and why things happen.
Argumentation - 1 We often encounter situations in which someone is trying to persuade us of a point of view by presenting reasons for it. We often encounter.
Building Logical Arguments. Critical Thinking Skills Understand and use principles of scientific investigation Apply rules of formal and informal logic.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 7 The argument from evil By David Kelsey.
Capstone Seminar Mr. Dana Linton. Logical fallacies are common errors of reasoning. If an argument commits a logical fallacy, then the reasons that it.
 Read the following argument. Examine it closely. Do you think it is logically sound? Why?  [T]he acceptance of abortion does not end with the killing.
Political Science 102 May 18 th Theories and hypotheses Evidence Correlation and Causal Relationships Doing comparative research Your Term Paper.
Age of the Sage Advertising, Inc. “I cannot teach anybody anything; I can only make him think.” Socrates.
Chapter 31: Fallacies of Weak Induction. Appeal to Authority (pp ) The fallacy of appeal to authority occurs when someone is taken to be an authority.
Big Idea 1: The Practice of Science Description A: Scientific inquiry is a multifaceted activity; the processes of science include the formulation of scientifically.
Debate: Reasoning. Claims & Evidence Review Claims are statements that serve to support your conclusion. Evidence is information discovered through.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 5 The Ontological Argument By David Kelsey.
1 Problem/Solution Proposals English 2010 Intermediate Writing.
Research Concepts. Agenda Research Basics What research is and is not Where research comes from Research deliverables Methodologies Research process Quantitative.
Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 9 Lecture Notes Chapter 9.
1 Problem/Solution Proposals English 2010 Intermediate Writing.
©2007 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Analyzing and Evaluating Inductive Arguments The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn.
1 Economic Thinking At the start of class, we used the review questions at the end of chapter 1 to review the remaining concepts. I did not emphasize the.
Logic Fallacies Debate Class Production Spain Park High School
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 5 The Ontological Argument By David Kelsey.
Chapter 12 Informal Fallacies II: Assumptions and Induction Invitation to Critical Thinking First Canadian Edition Joel.
Logical Fallacies Guided Notes
Chapter 10 Lecture Notes Causal Inductive Arguments.
Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Lecture Notes Chapter 12.
Rhetorical Fallacies. Slippery slope: We can’t do ________. That would lead to _______ which would lead to ________. youtube.com/ watch?v=9gJI.
TODAY’S GOALS Continue developing preparations for the class debate Learn advanced strategies for addressing counterarguments.
Fallacies The quickest ways to lose arguments. Introduction to Logic O Argument: The assertion of a conclusion based on logical premises O Premise: Proposition.
Errors in Reasoning. Fallacies A Fallacy is “any error in reasoning that makes an argument fail to establish its conclusion.” There are two kinds of fallacies.
There are many different types of fallacies, and readers/consumers should be able to identify fallacies when they occur in texts and advertisements. Appeal.
Critical Thinking Lecture 5b More Fallacies
Reasoning & Problem Solving Lecture 5b More Fallacies By David Kelsey.
Logical Fallacies A logical fallacy is an element of an argument that is flawed If spotted one can essentially render an entire line of reasoning invalid.
LOGICAL FALLACIES. COINCIDENTAL CORRELATION Assumption that because one thing follows another that the one thing was caused by the other. Y follows X,
Common Logical Fallacies Flawed Arguments. Logical Fallacies… Flaws in an argument Often subtle Learning to recognize these will: – Strengthen your own.
Evaluate Inductive Reasoning and Spot Inductive Fallacies
Common Logical Fallacies Flawed Arguments. Logical Fallacies… Flaws in an argument Often subtle Learning to recognize these will: – Strengthen your own.
Common Logical Fallacies FLAWED ARGUMENTS SUBTLE ERRORS IN JUDGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION.
Rhetorical Fallacies A failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid. Faulty reasoning, misleading or unsound argument.
The Human Sciences “The function of sociology, as of every science, is to reveal that which is hidden.” - Pierre Boudieu.
Persuasive Speech Unit Logical Fallacies Fallacy: A mistake in an argument that automatically invalidates it.
A Journey into the Mind Logic and Debate Unit. Week 2: May 23 through May 26 The Fallacies SWBAT: Identify the common fallacies in logic in order to be.
Logical Fallacies Engl 1302 Heilig. What are logical fallacies?  Bad!  Common errors in reasoning  Often substitute emotion for evidence  Often oversimplify.
TODAY’S GOALS Introduced basic and advanced strategies for counterarguments Continue planning for the class debate.
REFUTATION. CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE OF THE GOOD IT CAN DO FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. DURING THE 1960’S, THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT DID.
Skepticism David Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and John Pollock’s “Brain in a vat” Monday, September 19th.
How to Lie with Statistics
Common Logical Fallacies
Propaganda and Logical Fallacies
Detecting Causal Relations
Skepticism David Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
Common Mistakes in Weak Arguments
10.RI08 I can analyze and evaluate specific claims in a text to determine if the reasoning is valid and the evidence fully supports the claim.
More on Argument.
Common Mistakes in Weak Arguments
C/Maj Nicholas Schroder
Rumessa Naqvi November 22, 2018
Concise Guide to Critical Thinking
Rhetoric and Propaganda
Information, data, maps & photos explanation & analysis
Common Mistakes in Weak Arguments
Presentation transcript:

Critical Thinking Lecture 12 Causal Arguments By David Kelsey

Causal Arguments Causal claim: states or suggests the presence of causation. Examples: A causal argument has as its conclusion a causal claim. A cause is an event, person, place or thing X without which some other event, person, place or thing Y, X’s effect, would not occur, exist, etc. A cause necessitates its effect such that without the cause, the effect would not occur. Causes can’t just be correlations though. Causal powers

Post Hoc Fallacy Post Hoc Fallacy: When one thinks that just because X is followed by Y this must mean that X causes Y. Post Hoc is short for Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc which translates: The mistake is Thinking Correlation entails causation: Accidental correlation: this is a mistake because X could play no role in Y’s coming to be. X could merely be accidentally correlated with the occurrence of Y. 3 pennies example: Other possibilities besides X causing Y or X and Y being accidentally correlated:

Hypotheses Hypothesis: a supposition offered as a starting point for further investigation. When hypothesizing you are conjecturing, I.e. making a guess about some way the world is. How do we test a hypothesis? Look for counterexamples to it. What is a Counterexample? A counterexample to: Vitamin C cures colds

Relevant difference reasoning If some effect, Y, occurs in one situation & Y doesn’t occur in other situations similar we can try to find something that is different about this situation, I.e. X. We then suspect this difference X is the cause of Y. To find X, simply look for the differences between this situation and those situations that are similar but in which Y doesn’t occur. Use relevant difference reasoning when:

Which difference is relevant? Question: how do you know which is the relevant difference? Engine overheating:

Examples of Relevant difference reasoning Headaches: Post Office:

Common Thread Reasoning When do we use this kind of reasoning? Look for a common thread: some event, person, place or thing that is common to all the occurrences of the effect. Mosquito example:

Common mistakes in informal causal reasoning 1.) We can overlook alternative common threads or differences: If one difference or thread seems particularly relevant, don’t overlook others as you may miss the real cause in doing so. Example: 2.) We can focus on irrelevant differences or common threads: To know that a difference or thread is relevant you must have some knowledge of the situation, its causes and its effects.

3 more mistakes 3.) We can overlook the possibility that causation is the reverse of what has been asserted: Climbing a rope: 4.) We can overlook the possibility that the asserted cause and effect are both the effects of some third underlying cause: The leaves turning yellow: 5.) We can fail to consider the possibility of coincidence: The cancer example:

Doubtful causal claims 1. Appeal to Anecdotal evidence: watch out for a causal claim when the evidence is one or two cases only. Smoking doesn’t cause cancer: To show smoking doesn’t cause cancer we need to show that even if everyone smoked, the cancer rate would not increase. Can you do this with 1 piece of evidence though? 2. Circularity: The cause cannot merely restate the effect for if so we haven’t learned anything new. Insomnia example: 3. Excessive Vagueness: if a causal claim is too vague we won’t know exactly how it is to be tested. Bad Karma example:

Doubtful causal claims #2 4. Nontestability: we can’t have a causal claim for which testing is isn’t possible. Aids example: 5. Unnecessary assumptions: why needn’t make any unnecessary assumptions in asserting a causal claim? Déjà vu example: 6. Conflict with well-established theory: as a general rule, we don’t really want our causal claims to conflict with our theories. We can have theoretical advances, but… Height example:

Causal Explanations vs. Arguments A causal explanation is an explanation of the cause of something. Explanations vs. Arguments: while causal explanations can look superficially like arguments, explanations assert cause and effect while arguments try to prove that something is the case. Explaining causes: When we try to justify or defend or excuse something we or someone else did, we sometimes explain its causes. Bread example: But not every attempt to explain behavior is an attempt to excuse it: One might be simply trying to offer an explanation without any sympathy at all for the actions being explained. Nazi Germany example: