• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
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

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/28

Click to flip

28 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Deductive reasoning
When we compare an observation to what we already know. -Framework of knowledge. -Conclusion must follow a set of known premises. - If premises are correct than the conclusion is valid. - The conclusion must naturally follow.
EX: all people are mortal=true. My neighbor is a person=true. Therefore my neighbor is mortal=TRUE.
EX:I eat apples=true Everyone who eats apples is smart = untrue. There fore I am smart. = False because not all premises are true.
Inductive Reasoning
No framework of knowledge. We observe a large number of facts and put them together for a conclusion. Facts may be valid and the conclusion not valid. - Allows for possibility that conclusions are not valid when observations are valid. **Uses empirical evidence. EX: All of the ice I measured is cold. = true. therefore all ice is cold= true. EX: Certain minerals are found together. = true. Therefore, all minerals are like that = UNTRUE!!
Natural Experiments
When we observe nature and explain the causes. calmly observe nature and what is/has happened.
Manipulative Experiments
set up systems and see what happens. You expose nature to something it would not normally experience. Torture Nature. Chemist, biologist, geologist. Deals wish controlled studies. Control group is not affected and noe one group has the actual tests.
Blind Control study
the researcher does not know which group is affected to avoid bias. Used in medical fields and such.
Double Blind Control Study
when researcher nor subjects know if they are affected.
Confirmation Bias
the tendancy for looking for confirming evidence and ignoring nonconfirming. maybe more powerful. maybe not. Dont just observe what you believe or suspect.
expectation bias.
you see what you expect to see
selective memory
noticing or remembering what we believe to be true.
Testimonials
Use as evidence is very questionable. - this is where people witness accounts.
Ex: I saw bigfoot, lochness monster especially when caught off gaurd. Eye witnesses are valuable when prepared.
paraidolia
an illusion is clear to us in objects. Most common= faces. We are trained to remember faces. Imbread from child hood.
Not Bad Science

Speculation
Speculating about what is unknown. cannot be tested but is not bad science.
EX: the drake equation = how many places in the universe have civilizations advanced enough to communicate with us. Posing questions that cannot be answered does not mean its bad science.
Not Bad science

Posing a hypothesis...
that cannot be tested with present technology. Ex: is there life on jupiters moon's?
Not bad science

Honest Mistakes
misreadings, faulty equipment unknown to the user, bad readings...
Not Bad science

Wrong interpretations
...of best available data. Not burdoned by prior comitment, tentative.
Bad arguments:

Twisting the evidence
also using semantic arguments. Ex: changing wrong answers into correct ones by changing a definition or changing numbers. AVOID DOUBLE MEANING IN SCIENCE AND AMBIGUITY.
Bad arguments:

Authoritarian
the boss or smart guy spoke so it is correct. = wrong. A conviction of belief based on some authority. Ex: some big univerisity says something and you believe 100%
Bad arguments

"they laughed at the wright brothers"
Scientist were not laughing because they knew of the bernoulis equation. (principle behind air flight) If scientists are laughing at my idea this means there is no priciple behind it- no supporting principle. There is no reason to trust a new idea, you must have scientific principles backing it
Bad arguments

Conspiracy
sooner or later they will say it is a conspiracy against me by scientist. Don't want you to know. "Right to be heard" by scientists (no they don't) Science does not have bill of rights. scientist wouldn't listen because of violation of scientific priciples and not explained properly or correctly
scientist wouldn't listen because
of violation of scientific priciples and not explained properly or correctly
Bad Arguments

Residue
When 95% of observations are incorrect, flase, or hoazes. What do you do with the residue of 5%. chances are they are not valid (mistakes, hoazes...and cannot be demonstrated.) Should not trust them!
CAVEOT = WARNING! SCIENCE PROCEEDS ON ANOMOLIES.
Anomalies
Things that don't fit. Need to sudy this and explain this. Good credible data are not found in piles of junk VS. finding an anomolie in a pile of good data
BAd ARguments

Explanation by default
Science can't explain it so I must be correct = EX. wrong. Science can;t explain it YET.
BA

False dilemma
Wrongly assuming that only two explanations exist. -Politicians do thsi all the time. Ex. my idea is not so bad because yours is worse.
BA

begging the question
Circular argument. the answer is simply a rewrite of the question. - Provides a conclusion in a new form. Ex: can you be precise and incorrect at the same time.
BA

False Cause
A follows B. Does B cause A? no not neccessarily. Possibly C causes all to move. First you need a principle of science as to how cause and effect for how it happens. Ex: do cell phones cause cancer? we need a medical explanation of how it works
BA

Not fully explaining the phenominom
very importnant
when not explained you jump to conclusions
BA

Gee whiz facts, anecdotal, popularity, apeal to tradition.
need to boil down to the truth. Ex: mmost midical costs occuiur in the last 2 months of life. = wrong. YOu find something the very last place you look.