speaking (1962)‚ have since been highlighted through further sociolinguistic work. Such work includes an investigation into the formal instruction of the speech acts of giving and responding to compliments (Ishihara‚ 2004) and an examination of inductive and deductive approaches for teaching compliments and compliment responses (Rose & Kwai-fong‚ 2001). In the article Compliments in Cross-Cultural Perspective‚ Wolfson explores the speech act of complimenting‚ specifically in regards to its utility
Premium Pragmatics Sociolinguistics Linguistics
CRITICAL THINKING PSU LOGICAL FALLACIES Ad hominem or ATTACKING THE PERSON. Attacking the arguer rather than his/her argument. Example: John’s objections to capital punishment carry no weight since he is a convicted felon. Note: Saying something negative about someone is not automatically ad hominem. If a person (politician for example) is the issue‚ then it is not a fallacy to criticize him/her. Ad ignorantium or APPEAL TO IGNORANCE. Arguing on the basis of what is not known and cannot be
Premium Logic Logical fallacies Fallacy
Assess Hume’s response for rejecting miracles (35 marks) David Hume puts forward two separate but very closely related arguments against miracles. Hume argues that the probability of miracles actually happening is so low that is irrational and illogical to believe that miracles do occur. Hume is an empiricist‚ meaning that he emphasises experience and observations of the world as the way of learning new things. He argues that when investigating any story of a miracle‚ evidence can be collected‚
Premium Empiricism David Hume Argument
___ 1. Make this inductive (statistical) syllogism into a relatively strong argument by supplying an appropriate premise or conclusion: Greg must be into all that New Age stuff since he wears his hair in a ponytail. 2. Make this inductive (statistical) syllogism into a relatively strong argument by supplying an appropriate premise or conclusion: People who go to Burning Man are not like you and me. Why just look at how odd Greg is! 3. Make this inductive (statistical) syllogism
Premium Sampling Analogy Argument
meaning) e.g. amount in cooking; sexual relations by Bill Clinton 6. Contradictory terms put tgt(oxymoron) e.g. –ve growth; friendly fire; conditional self-rule Informal Fallacy – fallacies that can be discovered through analysis of content of the argument A. Linguistic Fallacy 1. Equitation(ambiguous lang) reading bk is better than nth; the more u study‚ the less u know 2. Fallacy of composition-assume characteristic of part will cause the same chracteristic to the whole e.g. Messi and football
Premium Logic Argument
beginning to examine arguments‚ or‚ stated more accurately‚ "would-be arguments‚" where people advance reasons for their beliefs that in fact do not support them. There are two main types of pseudoreasoning: those that appeal to emotions and those constructed like real arguments but failing in the essential task of providing real support. Lessons 10 and 11 will examine pseudoreasoning types that appeal to emotions. Lesson 12 will study pseudoreasoning types constructed like real arguments. Because pseudoreasoning
Premium Argument Fallacy Logic
action on Syria. Then moves on to make some profound arguments. Putin argues that a potential strike by the US‚ despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders‚ could lead to more innocent victims and escalation‚ potentially spreading the conflict beyond Syria’s borders. He is also stressing that a strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. I consider this a weak inductive argument by prediction. Although Putin’s premises may be true
Premium Vladimir Putin United States Argument
persuasion and argument? There are several differences between persuasion and argument. Persuasion is based on an individual’s opinion while an argument is based on presenting facts to support their position. Persuasion weighs heavily on emotions versus argument is very logic driven. 2. What is a deductive argument? An inductive argument? A deductive argument is intended to be a guarantee that the conclusion is correct assuming that the premises are true. Inductive arguments imply that it
Premium Logic Argument Reasoning
Question : In logic‚ arguments are never described as Student Answer: true. valid. inductive. sound. Instructor Explanation: The answer can be found in Chapter Three of An Introduction to Logic. Points Received: 0 of 1 Comments: Question 2. Question : Human reasoning tends to use a mixture of both Student Answer: oil and vinegar. induction and deduction. induction and reduction. reduction and deduction. Instructor Explanation: The answer can be found in
Premium Logic Deductive reasoning Reasoning
Chapter Eight – Inductive Reasoning An inductive argument is intended to provide only probable support for its conclusion‚ being considered strong if it succeeds in providing such support and weak if it does not. Inductive arguments come in several forms‚ including enumerative‚ statistical‚ analogical‚ and causal. In enumerative induction‚ we argue from premises about some members of a group to a generalization about the entire group. The entire group is called the target group; the observed
Free Logic Inductive reasoning