Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
40 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
starting point for cog sci
|
beliefs
desires/goals |
|
|
counterfactual supporting
|
effectiveness of folk psychology?
|
|
|
examples of mental states
|
believing
fearing knowing seeing hoping |
|
|
intentional mental state
|
ex believing
exhibits intentionality(about or towards some object) towards intentional content |
|
|
bretano's thesis
|
intentionality is mark of the mental
|
|
|
proposition
|
abstract, semantic content
"meaning" may take truth value represents interpretation? |
|
|
thought
|
equivalent to propositional attitude
|
|
|
deductive vs inductive
|
P's provide complete support for C's vs partial support
|
|
|
valid
|
applies to deductive
if all premises are true, lconclusion must be true |
|
|
sound
|
all premises are true
|
|
|
good/cogent
|
inductive
if premises are true, conclusion is likely to be true |
|
|
fallacies of relevance
|
-transfer/association (virtue, emotion, authority)
-name calling/labeling -ad hominem (guilt by assoc, poisoning well) -red herring -straw man |
|
|
argumentum ad Consequentum
|
appeal to consequences
fallacy of relevance transfer? |
|
|
argumentum ad verecundiam
|
appeal to authority
fallacy of relevance (can be OK, but not OK if irrelevant) |
|
|
ad hominem
|
attacking character rather than argument, guilt by assoc
fallacy of relevance |
|
|
red herring
|
ignoratio elenchi (ignorance of refutation)
change subject/argue for osmehting irrelevant ex = nixon |
|
|
straw man
|
fallacy of relevance
misrepresenting opponents position |
|
|
fallacies of presumption
|
-begging the question
-loaded question -hasty gen -cherry picking -accident/converse accident -overwhelming exception -slippery slope -oversimp -single cause -false dichotomy -ignoring common cause |
|
|
begging the question
|
assume what you are arguing to be true
|
|
|
loaded question
|
assume that some state of affairs holds when it may not
|
|
|
hasty generalization
|
often rely on stereotypes
sparse sample from which to draw a conclusion |
|
|
cherry picking
|
selectively choosing data to confirm view, ignoring other
confirmation bias |
|
|
fallacy of single cause
|
ignore possibility of multiple interacting causes
|
|
|
false dilemma/dichotomy
|
restricted set of alternatives
|
|
|
propositional attitude
|
attitude about the truth of proposition
intentional mental states |
|
|
heuristic vs bias
|
process vs result
|
|
|
BS vs fallacies
|
extreme vs not to extreme
manipulating input can effect output |
|
|
framing
|
anchoring (contamination)
valence of words |
|
|
availability heuristic
|
can affect estimate of risk
|
|
|
representativeness heuristic
|
evaluating probability by similarity to
1. essential properties of parent population (conjunction fallacy, linda) 2. salient features of process (gamblers fallacy, misperception of chance, coin toss) |
|
|
hindsight bias
|
overconfidence
debiasing has no effect (ex jury) |
|
|
affirming the consequent
|
not valid reasoning
if P then Q, Q, therefore P |
|
|
denying the antecedent
|
not valid reasoning
if P then Q, not P, not Q |
|
|
prescriptive vs descriptive
|
what people should do vs what people do do (cog sci)
|
|
|
atmosphere effect
|
bias when accepting argument where quantifiers seem to agree
ex doctors and women |
|
|
belief bias
|
people prone to accept arguments as valid that are empirically true
ex cars, motor |
|
|
accident
|
fallacy of presumption
dicto simpliciter (destroying exception) apply general rule to exception |
|
|
converse accident
|
apply exception as general rule
|
|
|
overwhelming exception
|
what have the romans ever done for us
|
|
|
fallacies of ambiguity
|
equivocation (diff meanings of same term
amphiboly (ambiguity in grammar) |
