Critical Thinking – Evaluating Logic – Part 1 of 3

hi my name is professor seibert and i will
be walking you through the third module for critical thinking so far you've demonstrated your ability
to differentiate various modes of discourse for instance you know that an opinion differs from an argument an opinion is usually highly rooted and
personal taste and preference opinions are very subjective whereas and argument is a claim that can be supported with evidence and logic therefore arguments are usually more
debatable than opinions are and they're usually more sophisticated than opinions too critically evaluate the validity of
an argument it is important to determine whether the
evidence we're raising used to support the argument makes logical sense can you precisely identified for the flaws in
someone's reasoning if so if you're more likely to improve
your own ways of thinking in constructing arguments have you ever been told by a parent or
partner if you leave me home alone tonight you
must not love me or have you ever been tempted to drink
or smoke because people say well everybody's
doing it or have you ever been tempted to buy
products being hawked by a hot celebrity whose only real knowledge about the
product is probably the sale price if so it's very possible that all of these
people are using logical fallacies to manipulate you're thinking logical fallacies for simply errors in
logic The term is derived from the latin word
falaire their meaning to deceive whether intentionally or unintentionally politicians lawyers salesman and
everyday people use logical fallacies to make their arguments seem stronger or more
persuasive than they really are once you were able to identify logical
fallacies you can make more rational informed
decisions about the ways you respond to others and about the ways you influence
others it helps to first accepted argument into its two basic parts the claim and the supporting evidence or logic let's look at this example i drank soda this morning and by the
afternoon my headache went away therefore soda must make headaches go away first let's ask ourselves what does this
person trying to prove or what does this person concluding in this case the conclusion or claim is
that soda makes headaches go away the evidence or logic they're using is that because they drank soda earlier
and the headache went away later that drinking so to cause the headache
to go away but where's the evidence that the soda
was really the pain reliever perhaps it was the breakfast the aspirin
or the meditation act that really cause the headache to banish for this
person regardless there is no evidence that
shows the causal relationship between the soda and the cure of the headache this is an example of a false cause
fallacy it's important to know that just because
x happens first and y happens later that is not necessarily mean that x
caused y to happen let's take a look at another example last year forty five percent of men who viewed the
show family guy had ringworm therefore the viewing family guy must induce parasites in male viewers that conclusion or claim that is being
made is that the viewing family guy induces parasites in male viewers what is the evidence or logic behind
this just because forty five percent of the
viewers have this parasite that does not necessarily mean that watching family
guy caused them to host the parasite even if the statistic was true which it
is not it's very possible or even probable that
this would be a mere coincidence and that watching the show would not
cause men to host this parasite the false cause fallacy presumes that a
real were perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of
the other before we take a look at some more
logical fallacies why don't you take a moment to review

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *