Modes of reasoning Questions

REASONING ABOUT Social Issues (MODR1760)

IN-CLASS TEST 3 (20%)

Total worth: 40 points

Student Name:

Student ID:

The test has two parts: part A (10 fallacies) and part B (5 arguments for argument analysis). Make sure to answer all the questions (scroll to the end). For your reference, the last page of the test includes the names of fallacies and criteria for argument analysis.

A) For each fallacy, do the following: (1) Represent the argument in the traditional form, (2) identify the fallacy and give its definition, (3) explain how the argument commits the fallacy and why the argument fails. (2 point each for a total of 20 points).

1. It is expected that we only do what is right. We have the right to eat as much as we want. Therefore, it is right to eat as much as you want.

2. Women in the United States are paid less than men. Therefore, my mom must make less money than my dad.

3. Biologically, fetus is human. Since all human beings have a right to life, fetus has a right to life.

4. Euthanasia is wrong because it involves helping someone to end his or her own life.

5. You ask how I can know that you're struggling financially?  It's simple: in a capitalist economy, you either win big or you lose big, and I know you're not one of the big winners.

6. Dr. Khan was a member of the committee who authored the report. I doubt that we can accept anything he has to say in favour of it.

7. Geraldo says that students who cheat on exams should not be automatically expelled from the school. But its ridiculous to insist that students should never be punished for cheating.

8. Judges should not hand down anything but maximum sentences for all convicted criminals. If you start making exceptions, prosecutors will start asking for lighter sentences. Next thing you know, every criminal will be getting off with a mere warning

9. Men and women are clearly not equal. They differ in various attributes. Men are stronger; women more verbal. So how can one say that we ought to treat them equally?

10. You think that welfare mothers would actually prefer to have jobs? There is no evidence for that. They are lazy moochers.

B) Argument analysis. For each argument do the following: 1) Identify the type of argument (abductive, analogy, causal, or inductive generalization); (2) Apply the appropriate criteria to the argument; (3) evaluate the argument (very weak, weak, moderately strong, strong) (4 points each, 20 points total). Do all the steps for each argument before moving to the next argument.

1. The case before the court involves a search by the city police of homeless man’s carboard shelter. At issue is whether it was proper for the police to enter the man’s shelter without either a permission or a warrant in order to search the evidence of a crime. A similar case—a relevant precedent—involved a search by the RCMP of an equipment trailer in which a man was living. In that case, the court ruled that the RCMP had violated section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the section that says, ‘Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.’) Therefore, the court should also rule that the search by the city police of the homeless man’s shelter violated section 8 of the Charter.

2. The 12 of us went on a hike through the mountains. We all drunk bottled water except Lisa, who drunk from a stream. Later she got really sick. Some intestinal thing. But the rest of us were fine. We went on this hike many times, and each time those who drunk from the stream got sick. Those drinking from the bottled water were fine. Everything else was the same. The water from the stream these hikes caused the intestinal illness.

3. The woman had been displaying bizarre behaviour for years, but recently she seems worse than ever. Sometimes she suddenly begins screaming, saying that there are snakes crawling on the walls. She shakes uncontrollably at the slightest noise. And she has started to bleed from her palms. The priest says she’s is possessed by demons, and he is right.

4. A prominent sociologist wants to determine the sexual attitudes of women aged 25 to 45. The main question to be asked is weather heterosexual women in this category are satisfied with the sexual performance of their partners. The sociologist interviews 200 of her Facebook friends who belong to the target group. She also asks 200 of her female colleagues at the university to complete and return a survey asking the key question. She gets 78 completed surveys in the target group. She finds that 75% of all the interviewees say that they are not satisfied with their partner’s performance. She concludes that most heterosexual women aged 25 to 45 are not happy with the sexual performance of their partners.

5. School violence is caused mainly by teens playing violent video games. Incidents of violence in schools have increased as more teens are playing violent video games, as the video games themselves have become more graphically and realistically violent, and as the number and ariety of video games have expanded dramatically.

List of Fallacies of irrelevance:

Ad hominem; Tu quoque (Ad hominem hypocrisy/circumstance); Genetic Fallacy; Poisoning the Well; Appeal to force/threat; Appeal to popular sentiment; Appeal to common practice; Appeal to Tradition; Appeal to emotion; Straw man; Appeal to Ignorance (Reversed Burden of Proof); Equivocation; Red herring; Fallacy of Composition; Fallacy of Division.

List of Fallacies of Insufficient reason and Unacceptable Premises:

Slippery slope; False analogy (Apples/Oranges Fallacy); False dichotomy (False Dilemma); False Cause (Post Hoc) Begging the Question; Hasty Generalization; Loaded Presupposition; Self-evident Truth

Argument Types and Criteria:

1. Causal Argument Criteria: Temporal priority; 2. Spatial connection/reasonable mechanism; 3. Covariance/correlation; 4. Rival causes.

2. Inductive Generalization Criteria: 1. Number of observations; 2. Systematic/Anecdotal; 3. Sample/Population; 4. Representation; 5. Adequate Scope.

3. Arguments from Analogy: 1. Truth of Similarities; 2. Relevancy; 3. Number; 4. Variety; 5. Disanalogies.

4. Abductive Argument: 1. Truth of Initial Observations; 2. Testability; 3. Fruitfulness/scope; 4. Simplicity; 5. Conservatism. 6. Comparison to alternatives.