Chapter 10: Logic and Reasoning
Chapter Outline:
Evaluating Ideas: Methods of Reasoning
Fallacies
The Ethics of Audience Adaptation
Embedded Files
Learning Objectives:
Distinguish among several different types of reasoning and recognize faulty or misleading types.
Better adapt your use of logic to a specific audience.
Analyze your own logic to determine if your conclusions are valid.
Chapter Vocabulary Terms to Know:
evidence
reasoning
logic
induction
case study
sign
analogy
deduction
premise
syllogism
fallacy
hasty generalization
false premise
circumstantial evidence
causality
correlation
false analogy
ignoring the question
begging the question
1. What types of reasoning does Sherlock use in his analysis of Mr. Watson?
2. What evidence does he provide to substantiate his claims?
3. Can you see any evidence of circumstantial evidence that may be present in his analysis of Dr. Watson's "condition?
“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
Sherlock Holmes Quote -A Scandal in Bohemia by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Sherlock Holmes Quote -A Scandal in Bohemia by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Western countries throw out nearly half of their food, not because it’s inedible -- but because it doesn’t look appealing. Tristram Stuart delves into the shocking data of wasted food, calling for a more responsible use of global resources.
Section 1 Review
Recalling the Facts
1. What is the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning?
2. Why is there no such thing as a perfect analogy?
3. Discuss: Is violence ever a just response to injustice? Remember, there is a difference between "just" and "justifiable." 'Just' means fair, upright, legal, reasonable. 'Justifiable' means excusable.
Section 2 Review
1. What type of fallacy occurs when you rely on a sample that is too small or is not representative of the whole?
2. Explain the concept of mistaken causality in your own words.
3. Discuss: In attempting to give her client the best possible defense, how far should an attorney go in persuading the jury? Can she justify omitting facts that might damage her client's case, even though that information might better serve the truth?
Section 3 Review
1. Why is political expedience unethical?
2. Why is logic important to a citizen in a democracy?
Page updated
Report abuse