Cpo Midter

Front 1

Affirming the antecedent

Back 1

VALID ARGUMENT 1ST PREMISE-If P, then Q
If the country is wealthy, then it will be a democracy
2ND PREMISES-P The country is wealthy
CONCLUSION-Therefore, Q.
Therefore, the country will be a democracy.

Front 2

Affirming the consequent

Back 2

INVALID ARGUMENT 1ST PREMISE-IF P THEN Q(If the country is wealthy, then it will be a democracy), 2ND PREMISE-Q(COUNTRY IS A DEMOCRACY), AND CONCLUSION-THEREFORE P(Therefore, the country is wealthy).

Front 3

Autonomous state

Back 3

c

Front 4

Consequent

Back 4

The THEN clause of an IF–THEN rule.second half of a hypothetical proposition. In the standard form of such a proposition, it is the part that follows "then".

THE THEN PART OF “If P, then Q”.

Front 5

Contractarian view of the state

Back 5

focuses on the conflicts of interests between individuals ONLY. STATE IS NOT INVOLVED, cede the rights they possess in the state of nature to the state in return for a guarantee of protection. organization that trades security for revenue.

Front 6

Credible exit threat

Back 6

c

Front 7

Denying the antecedent

Back 7

(INVALID ARGUMENT)PREMISE 1 (If P, then Q)
If the country is wealthy, then it will be a democracy
PREMISE 2 (Not P) The country is not wealthy
CONCLUSION (Therefore, not Q)
Therefore, the country is not a democracy.

Front 8

Denying the consequent

Back 8

(VALID ARGUMENT) MAJOR PREMISE-IF P THEN Q(If the country is wealthy, then it will be a democracy)MINOR PREMISE-NOT Q(The country is not a democracy) CONCLUSION-THEREFORE NOT P(Therefore, the country is not wealthy)

Front 9

Dependent State

Back 9

c

Front 10

Falsifiability

Back 10

a quest for knowledge thatrelies on criticism. The possibility that our theories or claims might be wrong is what allows for criticism.

Front 11

Induction

Back 11

observe individual cases and then use them to establish universal statements (general laws or theories).

Front 12

Invalid Argument

Back 12

when we accept the premises, we are free to accept or reject its conclusions.

Front 13

Method of agreement

Back 13

tells us to select cases that have the same outcome. “If two or more instances of the phenomenon under investigation have only one circumstance in common, the circumstance in which alone all the instances agree, is the cause (or effect) of the given phenomenon.”

Front 14

Method of difference

Back 14

STR0NGER THAT AGREEMENT. Allows us to determine whether certain conditions are sufficient AND necessary to cause an outcome.If an instance in which the phenomenon under investigation occurs, and an instance in which it does not occur, have every circumstance in common save one, that one occurring only in the former: the circumstance in which alone the two instances differ, is the effect, or cause, or a necessary part of the cause, of the phenomenon."

If one set of circumstances leads to a given phenomenon, and another set of circumstances does not, and the sets differ only in a single factor that is present in the first set but not in the second, then the phenomenon can be attributed to that factor.

Symbolically, the Method of difference can be represented as:
A B C D occur together with w x y z
B C D occur together with x y z

Front 15

Nash equilibrium

Back 15

a set of strategies (one for each player) such that no player has an incentive to unilaterallyswitch to another strategy.

Front 16

Necessary condition

Back 16

circumstance in whose absence the event in question cannot occur

Front 17

Politics

Back 17

the subset of human behavior that involves the use of power/influence.

Front 18

Power

Back 18

when people can’t accomplish their goals without:Trying to influence the behavior of othersTrying to wrestle free of the influence of others

Front 19

Predatory view of the state

Back 19

focuses on potential conflicts of interest between citizens and the state.

Front 20

Prisoner’s dilemma

Back 20

c

Front 21

Scientific method

Back 21

Step 1: Question -PuzzleStep 2: Theory or ModelStep 3: Implications (Hypotheses)Step 4: Observe World (Test Hypotheses)Step 5:Evaluation

Front 22

Sufficient condition

Back 22

A circumstance in whose presence the event in question must occur

Front 23

State

Back 23

a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical forcewithin a given territory”(Max Weber)“A state is an organization with a comparative advantage in violence, extending over a geographic area whose boundaries are determined by its power to tax constituents”(Douglass North)States are “relatively centralized, differentiated organizations, the officials of which, more or less, successfully claim control over the chief concentrated means of violence within a population

Hint 23

WHICH ONE IS SHE LOOKING FOR

Front 24

State of nature

Back 24

“war of every man against every man”in which life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. ANARCHY. expect citizens to accept a draconian set of responsibilities in exchange for the “protection”provided by the state. dilemmaGiven a certain degree of equality in the state of nature, everycitizen could gain by attacking their neighbor in a moment of vulnerability. The problem is that each citizen knows that they will frequentlybe vulnerable themselves. Clearly, everyone would be better off if they could all agree not to take advantage of each other.But if an act of violence or theft were to happen, it would be better to be the attacker rather than the victim.

Front 25

Theory (or Model)

Back 25

Theory is best thought of as a set of logically connected statements that explain the things we observe.Theory is often referred to as a model A model can be informal or formalA model is a simplification of the world.

Front 26

Valid Argument

Back 26

Argument where the truth of the premises does guarantee the truth of the conclusion. accepting the premises compels us to accept its conclusion.

Front 27

Understand what problems the creation of the state solves (cooperation and security)
and potential problems that may occur as a result (values of taxation and punishment).

Back 27

c

Front 28

Understand the implications of the Exit, Voice, and Loyalty model (When will states
predate on their citizens? What are the effects of natural resources or foreign aid on
state predation? Why would we expect to see variation in the economic performance
of dictatorships, etc?)

Back 28

c

Front 29

Be able to solve both strategic games (like the ”State of Nature” game in Chapter 4)
and extensive form games (like the EVL game in Chapter 3).

Back 29

c

Front 30

Be able to determine whether or not a statement is scientific or not, as well as whether
or not an argument is valid. You should know Mill’s Methods of Difference and Agreement
and the general problems with induction. More generally, you should know the
scientific method.

Back 30

c