What Might You Do To Avoid Fallacies In Critical Thinking?
Assumptions and Fallacies
What are assumptions? How do you think assumptions might interfere with critical thinking? What might you do to avoid making assumptions in your thinking? *
An assumption is something we take for granted. We assume our beliefs to be true and use them to interpret the world about us. We humans naturally and regularly use our beliefs as assumptions and make inferences based on those assumptions. We must do so to make sense of where we are, what we are about, and what is happening. Assumptions and inferences permeate our lives precisely because we cannot act without them. We make judgments, form interpretations, and come to conclusions based on the beliefs we have formed. At first glance, assumptions may not …show more content…
How are fallacies used in written, oral, and visual arguments? What might you do to avoid fallacies in your thinking? * * A fallacy is a flaw in logic, where the argument, answer, or result given does not match the evidence as set out. For example if I say, Mary is not a good person because she eats steak and vegetables. The explanation as to why she is not a good person is inadequate, as eating steak and vegetables has nothing to do with morality vegans and Buddhists morality aside, as that would be an implication and not part of the evidence presented. Early work in informal logic favored fallacies as a way of assessing informal arguments. Traditional accounts define a fallacy as a pattern of poor reasoning which appears to be a pattern of good reasoning (see Hansen 2002). Such accounts are a problematic basis for a general account of fallacies insofar as what appears to be good reasoning to one person may not appear so to another. In assessing ordinary arguments, these issues can be avoided by understanding fallacies more simply, as common patterns of faulty reasoning which can usefully be identified in the evaluation of informal arguments. In its treatment of fallacies, informal logic revives a tradition which can be traced to Aristotle. In the history of logic and philosophy, its significance is reflected in the writings of figures like Locke, Whately, and Mill. Today, this tradition manifests itself in textbooks and websites which attempt to teach good informal reasoning by teaching students how to detect the standard
What are assumptions? How do you think assumptions might interfere with critical thinking? What might you do to avoid making assumptions in your thinking? *
An assumption is something we take for granted. We assume our beliefs to be true and use them to interpret the world about us. We humans naturally and regularly use our beliefs as assumptions and make inferences based on those assumptions. We must do so to make sense of where we are, what we are about, and what is happening. Assumptions and inferences permeate our lives precisely because we cannot act without them. We make judgments, form interpretations, and come to conclusions based on the beliefs we have formed. At first glance, assumptions may not …show more content…
How are fallacies used in written, oral, and visual arguments? What might you do to avoid fallacies in your thinking? * * A fallacy is a flaw in logic, where the argument, answer, or result given does not match the evidence as set out. For example if I say, Mary is not a good person because she eats steak and vegetables. The explanation as to why she is not a good person is inadequate, as eating steak and vegetables has nothing to do with morality vegans and Buddhists morality aside, as that would be an implication and not part of the evidence presented. Early work in informal logic favored fallacies as a way of assessing informal arguments. Traditional accounts define a fallacy as a pattern of poor reasoning which appears to be a pattern of good reasoning (see Hansen 2002). Such accounts are a problematic basis for a general account of fallacies insofar as what appears to be good reasoning to one person may not appear so to another. In assessing ordinary arguments, these issues can be avoided by understanding fallacies more simply, as common patterns of faulty reasoning which can usefully be identified in the evaluation of informal arguments. In its treatment of fallacies, informal logic revives a tradition which can be traced to Aristotle. In the history of logic and philosophy, its significance is reflected in the writings of figures like Locke, Whately, and Mill. Today, this tradition manifests itself in textbooks and websites which attempt to teach good informal reasoning by teaching students how to detect the standard