• Shuffle
Toggle On
Toggle Off
• Alphabetize
Toggle On
Toggle Off
• Front First
Toggle On
Toggle Off
• Both Sides
Toggle On
Toggle Off
Toggle On
Toggle Off
Front

### How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

Play button

Play button

Progress

1/29

Click to flip

### 29 Cards in this Set

• Front
• Back
 QUANTITY BE AS INFORMATIVE AS REQUIRED DONT GIVE TOO MUCH OR TOO LITTLE INFO QUALITY DONT LIE DONT GUESS RELEVANCE DONT CHANGE THE SUBJECT MANNER A AMBIGUITY B BREVITY 0 OBSCURITY P POLITE 0 ORDERLY REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM IS Y REALLY ABSURD? DOES X REALLY IMPLY Y? CAN X BE MODIFIED IN SOME MINOR WAY SO THAT IT NO LONGER IMPLIES Y? IF 1 OR 2 = NO THEN REDUC. FAILS 3 = YES THEN REDUC. IS SHALLOW ATTACKING STRAW MAN ATTACK A WEAK POSITION THAT YOU HAVE FABRICATED INORDER TO SUPPORT YOUR OWN ATTACK A CLAIM WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING IT! REFUTATION BY PARALLEL REASONING INVALID ARG W/ PARALLEL CONCL = F PREMISES ARE TRUE ARGUMENT HAS TO HAVE SAME FORM EXPLANATIONS ANSWER WHYYYY 1 - GENERAL PRINCIPLE 2 - STATEMENT OF ITITIAL CONDITION 3 - CONCL. THEY GIVE YOU VAGUENESS BORDERLINE CASES IE CELEBRITY? ANIMAL SIZE HEAP WRITE: 1. ONE GRAIN OF SAND IS NOT A HEAP 2. IF ONE GRAIN IS NOT, THEN TWO GRAINS ARE ALSO NOT HEAP 3. IF N GRAINS ARE NOT HEAP, THEN N+1 IS ALSO NOT HEAP. CONCL - ANY NUMBER OF GRAINS DO NOT MAKE A HEAP PREM 3 IS FALSE ADN THIS SHOWS THAT NOONE WILL EVER BE BALD. SLIPPERY SLOPES NO DIGN. DIFERENCE BW BEING BALD AND NOT CONCEPTUAL WRITE: THERE IS NO SIGN DIFF. B/W 1 GRAIN AND 2 GRAINS THERE IS NO SIGN DIFF. B/W 2 GRAIN AND 3 GRAINS THERE IS NO SIGN DIFF. B/W 1 GRAIN AND N GRAINS CONCLU- THERE IS NO SIG. DIFF. BW I GRAIN AND HEAP FAIRNESS WHERE TO DRAW LINE? 1. THERE IS NO SIG DIFFERENCE BW A AND B 2. IT IS UNFAIR TO TREAT NOT SIGN. DIFFERENT CASES SIGN. DIFFERENTLY UNLESS PRAC. REQUIRES DRAWING A LINE SOMEWHERE 3A: PRAC. DOES NOT REQUIRE DRAWING LINE 3B: PRAC. DOES REQUIRE LINE BUT LIKE CAN BE DRAWN MORE REASONABLY SOMEWHERE ELSE CONCL - IS IS UNFAIR TO TREAT A AND B SIGN. DIFFERETLY ARG. IS FALLACIOUS IS BOTH 3A AND B ARE FALSE PREM 1 AND 2 ARE ALWASY TRUE CAUSAL ( DOMINO THEORY) ARE CLAIMED EFFECTS REALLY BAD? ARE ANY OF THE CLAIMED EFFECT REALLY LIKELY? DO THESE DANGERS OUTWEIGH THE BENEFITS OF WHATIS BEING CRITICIZED? YES TO ALL = STRONG ARG. ANY = NO THEN ARG. IS QUESTIONABLE ON THAT BASIS AMBIGUITY CONFUSION BAOUT SOMETHING MEANING FALLACY OF EQUIVOVATION - WHAT IS IT? MEANING ONE WORD IS AMBIGIUOUS FALLACY OF EQUIVOVATION - process DISTINGUSIH POSSUBLE MEANING OF AMBIG. EXPRESSIONS FOR EACH MEANING, RESTATE ARG. TO THAT EXPRESSION HAS CSAME MEAING IN ALL PREM NAD CLNCLUSION EVALUATE RESULTING ARGUMENTS SEPARATELY IF BOTH SYNTHESIZED ARG. ARE FALLACIOUS THEN EQUIV. EXSISTS IS EITHER IS SOUND THEN THERE IS NO EQUIVOCATION MERELY CONFUSION FALACY OF RELEVANCE STATING THINGS THAT ARE TRUE THEMSELVES BUT HAVE NO BEARING ON THE CONCL IS IS IMPLIED THAT THERE IS A VCONNECTION BW REASON AND WAHT YOU ARE ARGUING ADHOMINEM ARG ATTACK SPEAKER 3 TYPES DENIERS DENY TRUTH OF CONCLU NOT BECAUSE OF CONTENT BUT BC OF SPEAKER! ALMOST ALWAYS FALLACIOUS SILENCERS DO NOT ATTACK CLAIM BUT RAHER ARGUE THAT SPEAKER HAS NO RIGHT TO SPEALK IN CERTAIN CONTENT NOT ALWAYS FALLACIOUS. DISMISSERS SPEAKER IS UNTRUSTWORTHY/UNRELIABLE QYESTION THAT MOTIVES OF THE CLAIM NOT THE CLAIM ITSELF. NOT ALWAYS FALLACIOUS APPEAL TO AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE THE APPEAL OF AUTHORITY TO DO APPEAL OF AUTHORITY 1 - IS CITED AUTHORITY REALLY AN AUTHORITY IN THE AREA? 2- IS THIS KIND OF ISSUE THAT CAN BE SETTLED BY AN EXPERT OPINION 3- HAS AUTHORITY BEEN CITED CORRECTLY 4- CAN CITED AUTHORITY BE TRUSTED TO TELL THE TRUTH 5 - WHY IS APPEAK TO AUTHORITY BEING MADE AT ALL? IF 1-4 ANSWERS ARE YES - THEN APPEAL IS JUSTIFIED VACUITY ARG. ARE USUAL TRUE (VALID) AND MAY EVEN BE DONDS, BUT ARE FALLACIOUS BECAUSE THEY ARE CIRCULAR PREM IS CHAIN OF ARG. REPEATS BEGGING THE QUESTION PREMISE PRESUPPOSED CONCL YOU COULD HAVE NO REASON TO BELIEVE HTE PREMISE IF YOU DID NOT ALREADY HAVE SAME REASON TO BELIVE CONCLU. SELF SEALERS ARGUMENTS FOR WHICH NO CONTEREXAMPLE CAN BE PROVIDED SEEM PERFECT BUT ARE VACUOUS 3 WAYS AN ARG. CAN BE SELF SEALER CAN INVENT ARBITRATY WAY OF DISMISSING EVERY POSSIBLE CRITICISM CAN COUNTER CRITICISM BY ATTACKING CRITICS CAN USE WORDS IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE POSITION BECOMES TRUE BY DEFINITION CHANGING DEF. TO SELFISH TO MEAN ACTION TO DO WHAT YOU DESIRE TO DO 2 RESPONCES TO SELF SEALERS 1. ASK FOR A PREDICTION - IF ARG US SELF SEALER THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RULE ANYTHING OUT CREATE REFUTATION BY PARALLEL REASONING. JEWS AND PANDAS ARE RULING WORLD!