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;
27 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Argument
|
A group of statements in which some of them (the premises) are intended to support another of them (the conclusion).
|
|
|
Premise
|
In an argument, a statement, or reason, give in support of the conclusion
|
|
|
Conclusion
|
In an argument, the statement that the premises are intended to support
|
|
|
Cogent
|
Unknown
|
|
|
Valid Argument
|
A deductive argument that succeeds in providing conclusive support for its conclusion
|
|
|
Invalid Argument
|
A deductive argument that fails to provide conclusive support for its conclusion
|
|
|
Sound Argument
|
A deductively valid argument that has true premises
|
|
|
Strong Argument
|
An inductive argument that succeeds in providing probable - but not conclusive - support for its conclusion
|
|
|
Weak Argument
|
An inductive argument that fails to provide strong support for its conclusion
|
|
|
Testability
|
A criterion of adequacy for judging the worth of theories. A testable theory is one in which there is some way to determine whether the theory is true or false - that is, it predicts something other than what is was introduced to explain
|
|
|
Fruitfulness
|
A criterion of adequacy for judging the worth of theories. A fruitful theory is one that makes novel predictions
|
|
|
Scope
|
A criterion of adequacy for judging the worth of theories. A theory with scope is one that explains or predicts phenomena other than that which it was introduced to explain
|
|
|
Simplicity
|
A criterion of adequacy for judging the worth of theories. A simply theory is one that makes minimal assumptions
|
|
|
Conservatism
|
A criterion of adequacy for judging the worth of theories. A conservative theory is one that fits with our established beliefs
|
|
|
TEST Formula for Judging Weird Theories
|
A four-step procedure for evaluating the worth of a theory:
Step 1: state the theory and check for consistency Step 2: assess the evidence for the theory Step 3: scrutinize alternative theories Step 4: test the theories with the criteria of adequacy |
|
|
Demarcation Problem
|
Can we explain the difference between theories/explanations that we'd call scientific and theories/explanations that we would not call scientific?
|
|
|
Inference to the Best Explanation
|
A form of inductive reasoning in which we reason from premises about a state of affairs to an explanation for that state of affairs:
Phenomenon Q E provides the best explanation for Q Therefore, it is probable that E is true |
|
|
Theoretical Explanation
|
A theory, or hypothesis, that tries to explain why something is the way it is, why something is the case, or why something happened
|
|
|
Internal Consistency
|
A theory that is internally consistent is free of contradictions
|
|
|
External Consistency
|
A theory that is externally consistent is consistent with the data it's supposed to explain
|
|
|
Criteria of Adequacy
|
The standards used to judge the worth of explanatory theories. They include testability, fruitfulness, scope, simplicity, and conservatism
|
|
|
fMRI
|
Tracks changes of blood flow in the brain
The change in blood flow is indicative of a change in neuronal activity |
|
|
Warning Signs of Bogus Science
|
Claims a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work
Evidence is anecdotal |
|
|
Scientific Method
|
1. Identify the problem or pose a question
2. Devise a hypothesis to explain the event or phenomenon 3. Derive a test implication or prediction 4. Perform the test 5. Accept or reject they hypothesis |
|
|
Scientism
|
The view that science is the only reliable way to acquire knowledge
OR Science is the only reliable road to truth |
|
|
Subjective Validation
|
The phenomenon in which we tend to buy into vague general statements and interpret them as especially clear; predictive, and accurate
|
|
|
Confirmation Bias
|
Unknown
|
