Ctaea: Ch. 9 - Evidence

Front 1

evidence:

Back 1

supported material known or discovered, but not created by the advocate.

Front 2

forms of evidence. facts:

Back 2

descriptions of events, object, persons, or places that are empirically verifiable

Front 3

statistics:

Back 3

quantified descriptions of events, objects, person, places, or other phenomena

Front 4

examples:

Back 4

descriptions of individual events, objects, persons, or places

Front 5

hypothetical examples:

Back 5

examples made up used to explain an idea, but shouldn't be used as evidence for a claim.

Front 6

literal examples:

Back 6

events that actually happened, used for evidence and subject to the criteria for reasoning by example

Front 7

testimony:

Back 7

authoritative opinion evidence that interprets or judges events, objects, persons, or places

Front 8

weak testimony: conclusionary evidence:

Back 8

testimony in which only a conclusion is stated, with no indication of how conclusion was arrived at.

Front 9

classifications of evidence, primary evidence:

Back 9

comes from a source closest to the actual happening a source with firsthand information.

Front 10

secondary evidence:

Back 10

comes from a source that is at least one step removed from the actual happening, who has only secondhand info.

Front 11

expert evidence:

Back 11

comes from a source who is experienced and knowledgeable in a subject

Front 12

lay evidence:

Back 12

comes from a source who is neither experiences or knowledgeable in are of discussion

Front 13

casual evidence:

Back 13

evidence that naturally occurs without anyone trying to create it as evidence

Front 14

created evidence:

Back 14

something purposely recorded for future use (ex. birth certificate, yearbook as evidence there aren't enough minority students)

Front 15

tests of evidence, source credibility:

Back 15

examines whether the source of information has the background, knowledge, expertise, and opportunity to be relied upon

Front 16

source bias:

Back 16

whether the source of evidence has any self-interests that could distort perceptions or reports

Front 17

recency:

Back 17

considers whether the evidence came from an appropriate time period for the conclusion

Front 18

internal consistency:

Back 18

source doesn't say one thing at one time and the opposite at another

Front 19

completeness:

Back 19

refers to whether the source of evidence, or the evidence as presented in an argument, provides enough info for a critical thinker to accept

Front 20

corroboration:

Back 20

asks whether other qualified sources agree with this source of evidence

Front 21

Perella's hierarchy of...

Back 21

evidence

Front 22

Level 1, assertion:

Back 22

the arguer says that some evidence is true without providing any verification

Front 23

Level 2, judicial notice or common knowledge:

Back 23

when all parties agree to a fact, so there is no need to provide testimony to support it. involves ideas everyone is expected to believe even though the ideas may not be true

Front 24

Level 3, lay opinion:

Back 24

includes using, as evidence, reasoned opinion by people outside of their areas of expertise

Front 25

Level 4, expert opinion or consensus of lay opinion:

Back 25

reasoned opinion of someone about a subject within his or her field of expertise. agreement of the reasoned opinion of many people outside of their fields of expertise

Front 26

Level 5, empirical study and the consensus of expert opinion:

Back 26

well designed, observational research about the subject, agreement of several people who are experts in their field

Front 27

Level 6, consensus of studies:

Back 27

agreement among several well-designed research studies.

Front 28

Fallacies associated with evidence:

Back 28

-suppressed evidence (overlooked evidence)
-poisoning the will (suppressing evidence that eliminantes a source of evidence form consideration by claiming the source is flawed when there is no true relationship between the alleged flaw and reliability of source)
-slippery slope
-solid slope (act(s) should be carried out because it won't have significant consequences, when no evidence given to support, etc.
-self-evident truths (appeal to beliefs)
-argument from authority (something is true because an authority figure accepts the claim)
appeal to traditions (because it's been done in the past
-appeal to anonymous authority (claim should be accepted based only on evidence that unidentified authorities accept it
-appeal to the people (argument by consensus, bandwagon appeal)
-common person appeal (common man appeal)
-appeal to pride (flattery)
-snob appeal (accept something based on the fact that famous people accept it)
-appeal to common practice (something is right cause others do it)
-ad nauseum (reasoning that a claim is true based onlky on evidence that is has been made so often
-significance (misuse of statistics, questionable statistics and uses of it)