ThinkingCritically A ConciseGuide

John Chaffee,Ph.D. Dirc<1o4Cent€. fot Ctltical Thinkingand LanguageLeahing, Lacuadia Co[ege City Univetsryof ,tew Yo*

ITOUGHTON MIFFIIN COMPANY AOSTON NEW YORK cr{atrTE*t cdns.nLti,tAls,rdts 191 Constructing Arguments Considercarefully the lollolving dialo$e about lvhethermarijrana shorild be letalized: Denrisj Did you hear aboui the person who was sentencedto fifteen yearsin prison for possessingmarijuana? I think this ls one of the most outrageously r-njustpunishments I've ever head ofl In most states,people \ .ho arecon- victed of armed robbery,rape, or even murder don't receivefifteen-year seniences.And rnlike the possessionof marijuana,these crimes violate the rights of other people- Becognizing Consvucting Canlir€: I agreethat this is one casein lvhich ihe punishmentdoesn'i seemto fit the crime.But )rouhave to realizethat dru8s posea seriousthreat to the young people of our countrt: Look at all ihe people who are addict€d to drugs, \^'ho have their lites ruined, and who oiten die at an early a8e of overdoses.A]1d thinl< of a11ihe c mes committedby peopleto support their drughabits.As aiesult, sometimessociety has to make an exarnpleof some- one- like the person you meniione.l- to convincepeople of the serious- nessof ihe siluation. DerrrisrThat's ridiculous. In ihe first place,it's not right to punish someone unfairly iust to provide an example.At leastnot in a societyihatbelieves in justice.And in the secondplace, smoking marljuanais nothing like using drugs such as heroin or even cocaine.lt Iollows that smoking marijriana A io.m olth nkinq n wlr ch .ertain reasoneare o{fered should not be aSainstthe lar'. Cdtoline:I dan't agree.Although marijuana might not be as dangerousas some other dmgs, smokjng it sr.e1y isn'i good for vou. And I don't thlnk Constructing that anyihing ihat is a ihreat to your health should be legal. Drnnisi What about cigarettesand alcohol?lve lnorr that they are dangerous. Medical fesearchhas linked smokinScigarettes to lun8 cancer,emphysema, and heart disease,and alcohol dama8esthe liver No one has proved that marijuanais a ihreat to our health.And evenifit doestum out to be some- Evaluating what ujrhealtht it's certainlynot as dangerousas cigarettesand aLcohol. Cdloltri That'sa good point. Bri io tel you ihe trlrth, I'm not so sure ihat cit' Understanding jn DedudiveArg uments arettesand alcoholshould be legal.And any case,the,v are alread,\r legal. Appl.aton ol a genefaru e Justbecause cigarettes and alcohol are bad for your health is no reasonto Iegalizeanoiher drug that can causehealth probl€ms. Dcrrlsj Look- life is full of risks. lve take chancesevery time we crossthe streeior climb inio our car.In fact,rvith all of theseloonies on ihe road,d v- ing is a lot more hazardo s to o1lfhealth ihan any of the drugs around.,And manl' of the foods we eat can ki1l. Ior example,rcd meat contributesto hearidisease,and artilicial sweetenerscirn cause cancer. The poini is, iipeo ple want to iak€ chnnceswith their hellih, thafs up to them. And many 190 Lo2 ch.pr€rsr\ rlr 5r co,sfnr.$,S/rrylr0rr 193

Crrolr?eiMafijuana may not be physically addictive like heroirl, but I ihink 'jl l-i{l ,\L T l,t, 116I( l1,ld that it can bc pslchologicnllv addictive,because people tend to use more and more ofit over time. I knoiv a number ofpeopLewho spenda lot oI th€ir iime geiting high. 41ataboui Carl?All he doesis lie around and get high- 'Ihis shows thai smoking it over a period of time definiiely affects ),our mind. Think about the people you know $'ho smoke a lot don't ihey seem to be floating in a dream lvorld? How are they ever going to make an)'thing of their lives?As far as I'm concemed,a potheadis like a zombie living but dead. De risr Since,vouhave had so little experiencewith marijuana,l don'i think thai you can offer an informed opinion on the subject.And anywat if you do too much of anythint it canhurtyou. Even somethingas healthy as €xer cisecan causcproblems if )'ou do too mrch of it. But I sure don't se€any ihing wrong wiih toking up with some ftiends at a pariy or even getting into arelaxedstate by yourself.In faci,l find that I caneven concentrate bet- ter on my schoolworkafter takirg a litiie smoke. Carcli"€i lf you believe that then marijuana really ras damagedyour brain. lbu're just trying to rationalize your drug habit. Smoking marijuana doesn't help you concentrate it takes ]rou a$-ay from realiiy. And I don't think that people can control it. Either you smokeand surrendercontrol of "Let H€rbsGrow Free!" vorr life, or ),ou clon't smok€ becausevou rvant to retain conirol. Therc's t l\'ould ]ou bein.iirNl lo loin a "l egalizeNhrijuana" prolesl like thisone? lvhy do nothing in behveen. nlne peoplcbeLic\t lhai marijuanishould be legilizedl i\ hv do oilrersbeljeYe it Dcflrisr Let me point out something to vou: Becausemarijuana is illegal, ortanized crime controlsits distribution and makesall ihe money tuomit. ff marijuanawere legalized,the governmentcorild tax the saleof it -like cig- peoplein our socieiy like b mellorv out $,ith marijuana.I read somelvhete arettes and alcohol and th€n use the money for some lvorthwhile pur- that o\cr 70 percentof lhc Lr(r,Pl('inth€ United Statesthink ihat marijuana pose.For erample,many stateshave legalized gamblin8 and usethe money shouldbe legalized. io sLrpporteducation. Il1 fact, the major tobaccocompanies hav€ already Crro/l,1ejThere's a big (tifferencebet ,€enletfing peopledri\.e cars.nd lctinr€l copyrightednames for diflerent marijuanabrands - like "AcapldcoGoId." them use dangerous,:lrugs.So.ietl' has i fesponsibilii),to proteci people Obviousl},',theybelieve that marijuanawiU soonbecome 1egal. from thcnrsehes. Peq)le oftel do thnrgsthat arc iooiishil the) areencour- Cntuline:Just becausethe gLx'emmentcan make mon€y out of someding aged or givcrl the opportunitv to. I rgaliziig somethrnSlike mdrijuam doesn'tmean that fiey shor d legalizeit. We could alsolegalize prostitution ercouragespe(rple to Lrseit, espc.iall,vloung Peopic.tt foLlowsthai many or muggings and then tax the proceeds.Also, simply becausethe cigarette morc peoplc !!ould use mnriILln,r ii it lver€ leg.lliz€d.lt's like societysay- companiesare preparedb sell marijuanadoesn't m€an that it makessens€ i,rg, "This is ail fight - go ah€artand usc it. ' to. Afier all, ihey're the oneswho areselling us cigarettes. Dl]/rrlis:I stjll rn.rinlain thai mafiju.rna jsn't dangerous.Ii's not ddLlictive like heron is and th$c is no e\'fien.e that ii hnrms !(rt. Consequenilli, Continue this dialo8ue,incorporatin8 other viefl s on the sribjectof legalizing .lnytlLDg th.it ;s h.,Ilnlessshoulcl b!' l('gil. fi Recognizing Arguments Usht olll definition, we can .teture ihe mnin ideas th.lt make up .rn argun€ni.

The preceding discussion is an illustration of two people engaging in di,alogr.e, which we have defined (in Chapter 2) as the systematic exchange of ideas. Par- icatons stat€mentJ that suppott anothet ttatement (known as a cond6ion), ticipatint in this sort of dialogue with others is one of the keys to thinkjng crit- iustify it, or make it more probable icallv because it sfimulates )'ou to der.elop your mind by carefully examining the way vou make sense of the world. Discussing issues with othe$ encour- ages you to be mentallv active, to ask qDestiont to view issues froB different con(rusronA etatemertthat explains,atsefts, ot predldson the bajis ofrtate- PersPectives,anci io develop reasonsto sripportconclusions. Ii is this last qual ments(known as reasons)that arc oflercd asevidence for it ity of thinking critically * supporting conclusionswith reasons- that we will focus on in this chapt€rand ih€ next. \4tr€n we offcr reasonsto suppori a conclusion,r{e areconsidered tobepre- The type oi thinking that uses argument- reasonsin support of conclu- senting an r,g nerl, sions- is knoR'nas /crsonnrg,and ii is a iype of thinking you havebeen doing ihroughout this book, as rvell as in mr"rchof your life. nr€ are continualtytry- in8 to explain,jNtiftr and predict things throuth ihe processof reasoning. atgument A lorm of thinking in which ertain statements are keatont) Ofcourse,ourrcasoning an.l the reasoningofoihers is not alwayscor- offercd in tupport of anothet statement (a condusion) rect.For example,the reasonssomeone offers Inav not really support the con- clusion thev are $uppos€d to. Or the conclusion may not realv folloB, fuom the reasons statcd. These difficulties are illustratod in a nluiber of th€ arguments At tlte beginninS of the dialogue, Dennis Fesents the following argument against imposing a fifteen-yea. sentence for poasessionof marijuana (argunent 1): contained in the discussion on ma juana. Ncuertheless, $.henever *e accept a condusbn as likelv or true based on certain reasonsor whenel.er $c offer rea Reasor; PossessinSmarijuana is not a serious olfense becaus€ it huns no one. sons to support a conclusio& we arc using arguments to engage in reasoning Rrasotr. There are manv other more seriousoffenses in which victims' basic -evcn if our reasoningis t\'eakor faulty and needsto be improved. In this rights are violaied - sl1chas armed robbefy,rape, and murder - for R'hich chapterand the nex! we wiLLbe expleringboth the wav lve constructeffeciive the oflendersdon't receivesuch stiff sentences. nrgumcnt5dno thF\\.) $(,\.riLrflte.rrtumenrsrc dc\clop.rnd:rrrppr our Co clrsiofi; Thcrefore,a fifteen year senienceis an unjust punishmentfor pos- reasoningability. sessingmarijuana. l,et us return to the discussionabout marijuana.After Dennis presentsthe argurnentwith the conclusionthat the fifteen-ycarprison sentenceis an rlust Can you identify an additionai reasonthai supportsthis conclusjon? ptmishmcnt, Caroline considefsthat ar€iumont.AlthouSh sh€ acknowledges that in ihis case"the punishmentdocsn'i s{(m to fit thp crime,',she goes on to offcr anotherargument (argumeit 2), giving reasonsihat lead to a conclusion The definition ofnrgunrnf given hereis somewhatdifferent from the mean- thai conflictsh.ith the one D€'nnisdrewl ing of the concept in our ordinary language. In common speech, "argumenr, usually refers to a dispute or quarrel between people, often involvint intense Rensor:Drugs posea very scrious threatto the voung peopleof our country. feelings (for example: "t got into a terrible argument with the idiot who hft th€ R?asot: tlanv c'rimes are committed to support drug hnbits. back of my car"). Very often thes€ quarrels involve people presenting argu- Corclrsiorj As a resu[ sometimos s(riety h.rs to make an example of some ments in the sens€ in which $.e ha!-e defined the concept, althouth the argu on€ to conr.incc people of the seriousnessof the situation. ments are usually not carefurllvrcasoned or clearlvgtated because the people are so .1ngry.Instead oI this common usate, in this chapter lve will use the Can tou idcntifv an addirion.rlreason that supports this conclusion? rvord's mor0 iechnicalmeanins. 196 Chaptersx CoDtrr.,t,8.1,Sffir,ls R.mjhi.irg,4/lar,.,1l t97

Cue Words for Arguments leadsme to believeihat allows us to deducethat Our languagepfovides guidancein ou( effortsto identifu leasonsand conch- sions. Certain key words, known as 6,ie ruo/ds,signal that a reason is being offered in support of a conclusion or tlut a condusion is being announced on Of course,identifying reasons,conclusions, iind argumentsinvolves morc the basisof ceftain reasons.Fo! example,in responseio Caroline/sconclusion il'$n looklng for cue words. The I'ords and phraseslisted here do not always that society sometimeshas to make an exampleof someoneto convincepeo- signal reasonsarld conclusions,and in many casesargrJments are made wiih- p1e of the seriousness of the situation, Dennis gives the following aBument out th€ use of cue rvords. Ho*-ever, cue &'ords do help alert us that an argu- (argument3): ment is being made. Redsorj In the first place,it's not |ighi to punish someoneunlairly just to pro- vide an example. Reasor; ln the second place, smoking marijuana is nothing like usinS druts .-, such as heroin or even cocaine. lftS r rsKr!rc Acrtvtry 6,{ Cokchtsioft:It tollows that smoking marijuanashould not be againstthe law f-L ldentif!'ing Arguments with Cue Words tn this argument, the phras.:s in thef6t place and in ttu se.nndplace sig al thal 1. Review the discussionon marijuana,and underline any words reasonsare being offer€d in supportof a conclusion.Similarly, the pfuaseifl.01- cue sig- naling that reasonsare being offered oi that conclusionsare lolrs fftaf signals that a conclusion is being announc€don the basisof certain being reasons,Here is a list of the most commonlv used cue words for reasorlsand 2. With the aid of cue wordt idenhfy the vadous arguments contained in the d i- Lrssiolor marijurnd. For cachdrgumenr, de,cribe CueWords SigrlolingReaso s a. The rdasoflsoffered in suppori of a conclusion b. The.ordltsion amounced on the basis ol the reasons Before you starl review the ttuee arguments we have examined thus far in the firsi (second)place in this chapter. as shown by fiay be ir{erred from 3. Go back to the additional argumentsyou wiote on page193. Reorganize as indicated b),r may be deduced ftom and add cue words iI necessary to clearly identify your reasons as well as the conclusionvou drew from thosereasons, Srventhat may be derived {rom assummg that for the reasonthat

Cue Wotds Signalhg Coflrh6ions rfl r:rtKrfltc pAssAcEs therefore then -, ^l!Ff thus it follows thai +:L LegalizingDrugs therebyshowing The following t\a o essays discuss the issue of whether drugs should be legal- demonstratesthat ized. The firstpassage,"Drugs," is written by Core Vidal, a well-known e6say (which) shows that allows us to infer that ist and novelist.The se.ond, "The Casefor Slaverr" is authoredby New York (which) proves that suttests r.ery strongl]' that Times editor and columnist A. M. Rosenth.ll. After caretullv rcading the implies that essavs,answer the ouestionsthat follow DRUGs* It is a luck]' thing for the American moratist that our counEy has by Gore Vidal always.\LsredIn a Und ol time.vacuum:Wo have no Dublicmemorv of lt is possibleio stop most drl g addictiorl in the Unitcd Stateswiihin a anv h nBthdt happerpd berure lrst Iue.ddy.\o,,ne in i{ashirgtonroiav very short iime. Simply makc all drugs,iviiilablc ind sell ihcn at cost. recd'r>$l-ar happeneddurirg the yerr. d.,oroi wrs forbidJ.r tu the people Labcl each drug with a precisedescripiion of what effcct - Eood and by a Congressthat thoughi it had a divine mission to stamp out bad - the druit r-ill have on the taker.This l\'ill require heroichoncstr Demon Rum- Launching,in the process,the greatestcrime war.e; the Dorr't say that marijuana is addictive or dangerouswhen it is neither,as country's histor, causing thousands of deatfis ftom bad alcohol, and cle- millions of peoplc knorv - unlike "speed," \lhich kills most unpleas atinS a general (and persisting) contempt among the citizenrv for the antly, or heroin, vvhichis ad.li.tive and ditTicultto kick. laws of the United States. For the rccord, I havc iried oncc-almost el-eri/ drug ard liked The same ihing i6 happening today. But rhe govcrnment has tearned nol1e/disproving ihe popular Fu Manchu iheolv that i single whiff of nothint ftom past attempisat prohibiiion, not to mention repression. opium will enslavethc mind. Ne\erthelessmany drugs are bad for cer- Lastyear when the supply oI Mexicanmadjuana was sliqhilv curtailed inin people to take and they should be told why in a sensibleway. b, the teds, the pu\hers got lhe kid\ trooted on heroil and deaths Along with exhoriation and wamjng, it might be good for our cihzens inGeased dramatically, pafticutarty in New york. Whose faulr? !!,it men to recall (or learn for the first time) that the Uflited Statesrvas the cr€ation like th€ Mafio6i? Permissive Dr. Spock? Wild-eved Dr Leary? No. of men who believed that eachman has the righi to do rvhdi he r\'ants fhe.-,\ ernmentof the L nired Statcswa. re\ponsiblefo;$o,e derths with his o$'n life as lons as he doesnot interfcrewiih his neighbor'sprlr The bureaucraticmachine has a vestedintercst in playing cops and rob- suit of happiness.(That his neighbor's ca ol happinessis persecuting bers. Both the Bureau of Narcotics and the Mafia want srrons laws others doesconfuse matters a bit.) dgainstthe saleand ure oi drugs becnu* if drugs are sold at cosr rhere This is a startling notion to tlrc cuncnt generation of Americans. Th€y would be no money in it for dnyone. reflcct.r svstcmof public cducationlvhich hasmade the Bill of Rights,jit- IJ th€re was no money in it for the Mafia, there would be no friendty erall, unacceptableto a majorit) ofhigh schoolBraduates who now form pldyground pushers,drd .dd;Lts tv()uld n,,t . orrmit cfimcs to na\ for th; ihe "silent mnjority" - a phraser{'lieh ihat rnderestim.ted wit Richard ne\l'i\ firally,if the'eh.r- no moneyin it.rhe BuredL, of Ndr.;,;;. ould " Nixou took from llomcr $,ho usedit to descrlbethe dead. wlther away, something they ar€ not about to do wlthout a siruggle. No$ one .an hear ih€ rvarning mble begin: U clervone is allor/'ed Will anything sensible be done? Of course not. The Amedcan peool€ to take drugs eleryonc will and the cNP r{ill declease,the Commie$ i\.ill are ds deloted to the idea of sin and its punishmentas they are to m;t_ stop us hom ma].int everyone ftee, and lve shall end up a racc of zom- ing monev and lightinS druSs is nedrty d5 bi8 a busrn"i. u" pust ing bies, passivelymurrnuring "groovy" to one nnother.Alarming thought. them. Since the combination of sin and monev is irresistible (particularl; Yet it sccmsmost unlikely that any reasonnblysane person will become to the orore.rionalpolihcidn,. the situatron s iil onlytrow *.r"e. a drug addict if he knows in advancelvhai rddiction is going to t e like. Is cveryone reasondblysane? No. Sone people will ,ilwavs become drut addicts iust.rs sonrepeople willalllnvs becomealcoholics, and it is THr itst too bad- Elery man, however,has thc'power Gnd should ha!'e ttle CasE fo8 SLAVERY* legal righ0 to kill himself if he chooscs.But sincemost mcn don't, they by A. M, Rosenthal be mainLinerscither. Neverthclcss,folbicl.ting things they Acrossthe roulltrt a scatteredbut 'von'i People influential collectionof intelleciualsis likc or think they mi8ht enjo],onlv rnakesthcm rlani thosethirlts all ihe inienselyengaged in making the casefor slavery_ more. fhis psycholoijicdlinsight is, for somemysterious re son,perenni' l\ ith . on"iJerdble p,r,- on. tnesr.,emer i,rn. .rre rcFeatedl) c\pound- i 1y denied our goremors. ing the benefitsofnot ont),tolemring sla\.erybut legalizinSit:

lntar". 11D,.,:,i ,: s:: ( 'Frum -il vsra('lnr ni Eiir hL core vidnl. C.rprrighr l9rrl, l9trl, l9;1. l ' "Th. asefor slarcrv,"hv :\ [{ Rohrhrt, The\n r. tt,* fijn.j, setlenber16, 1989 Capyrighr bv Co( Viddl. ftcprinted L,vl!(rmirsion.i ll rndonl Ho!s., nrc iCI989 by rh€ Nea link Tihcs Co. Repri.ied b).p.msson It r{'ould make iife l€'i;sclanl4crous tor the f('e. [t would save a gre.1t Earlier this veaa nn e\pcrt dnrg pctti.ltri.i.rn rold nre thit afrer ontv a deal of money.And sincethc cconomies(ould be us€dto inlprole fie lot 'f\ a, nrh.t.)be.l\ L.rrrr,r... l .,.l lr(!jLrr.e..r'.1r. ,.,'\Fr \, \\ !\! of the slaves,irl the end they would bc bctteroff. lc.rn thai !t ltifyhg beh.rriornl efle.ts l,rstnt le.st rhrorLghc.rrly child, l'he ncw antiabolitionists, like iheir predccessorsin thenineteenthcen- hood. lvlll thev Lrstiorc!!,r? tury, con(edethat thosenow in bondagedo not th€mselv('ssee the bene- Ho\{. long wjll crackaffe(t neurol%ical part€rnsin the brainsot ndult tits of legalizing their statur. crnck users?Dr. Gabriel C. N.rhasof Columbia Univeniitv argrcs in his But in time the!, &ill, we are assured,becausc the beautiful part of neu book, C,).ri?c:lrc Cr,,,rlhlrtt.ll.i{r/?, thai ihe dnmagema\ be irre, legalizationls thilt slavery would be designedso as to keep slavespac! \'crsiblc. Wb(ld it roi bc nn n(t of slmFle iLrtclligen.eio dfop rhe l0tsirl- fied wiih the very thing thai €nslavestheml izaiion c. piign llniil r.e find out? The fofm of slavery under discussionis drug addiction. lt does not Then Nh]" do.r numberoi v\'ritersnnd n.ddemiii.rns,lcft to right, st|p- have every charactedstic of more tradition.rl forms of bondage. But they port it? I h.r!.cdiscrlsscd this with anridnrg lcnder-\l;ke Jcsselackson, Dr. have enough in common to makc the comparisonmorau]' \'alid - i'1d Uitchcll Rosenihalrrf Pho0|i\ Ilouse, ancjW'iUiam l. Bc,Nrcit,who search the campaignfor dnrg letalization morally disgusiing. for answersihemselves. Like the plantaiion slavery that was a foundationof American socjety R'rhaps the answeris th.t the legalizelsnre nor dealingr!ith re.lliir jn for so lon& drug addiction lartely involres speciiable groups of people. .{merica.I think thc reasimhas to do \.virh.lass. ,\4ostof the enchainedare children and adolcsccntsof all colorsand black Crack is beginning to nx)!c into the white rn;(ldLennrt rppcr ctasscs. and Hispanic adults. 'Ihai is a tragedv for thosofddictecl. Lik€ planthtionslaver)', drug addictionis passedon from generationto Holrercr, it hasnot \ ct desirovedthc coNmrnrjtiesirround slrich thcir generation.And this may be the mosi important similarit),:Like planta- Ilvcs rerolve, not takenovcr.v.n strcctnnd cloorrrn\:It has not passed tion slar.ery, addiction can destroy amont its victims the social resources g('nerahonto generatimr.1mong them, killinB the conrinuit!.of familv. most valuable to free people for their own betterment - frmill' Me, fam- BLrtin ghetto communitiespovertl nnd druits come togdher in a cit- ily traditjons,fRmily values. nh,tic reactionthat ls redlrcing lhem to socinlrubbl(,. In plantation-iimeAm€rica, mothers lvere taken from their childr€n.tn The arrti.lboliiionists,virtlralh all !vhit!' rr.l r.ell-to-do, do not soeor drug-time America,moihers ab.tndontheir children.Do the childrcn suf- do noi care.Eithcr wav th('l slrolv svmptomsoi rhe .,1i1(rusnessof.t.lss. fer less, or the mothers? That can be a pnrticuLrrl! ,:LinUerousso(j.rl disorctcr Antiabolitionistsargue that tegalizationwould makeLtugs so cheapand availablethat the profit for crime $'ouldbe removed.Well-sr.rpplied addicts would be p€acefuladdicts. We rvould not !,rdsiebjllions lor jails and cou.lcl spcnd some the savings helping dre addicted becomeclrug-free. of Anaiysis That rvould happen at the \.ery time that new miilions of Americnns Quest/onsfor were being enticedinto adclictjonby legalizitron- somehoi{. 1. ldeniify nnd ('!vrite the argumentsrhnt encbc)f thc.uttrors usesio sllpport Are we really foolish enough tu b€lieve that tensof ihorN,lndsof drug Bang his position rcgnrdhg the l('B.llizntionofdnrgs, using ihc ioitorvhg fornr.ri: mcmb€rs R'ould meekly stenl n$'at foiled by tht man'els of ihe ftr market? Not likelv. The pllshels would cut pric$, m.rkinS more money than ever from the c! cr-grolt ing mass market. Thev rrould immedintely increas€thE Foterclr and vrrietv beyond anything availnbleai anv gov- Usecue words hclp ernment-approve.tnarcotics counters. to loll identifv,rfULrnrrnts. Crime would jncrease.Crack plod cesp.rrnnoid riolence. \tor€ pe!- 2. Constructone new nrsumclrt io support {rn.h sillc (,1thjs is!ue, usinii thc missiven $s equalsmo.e use equalsmore viol.nce- form shoirn in qft'stion l. And *hat r!ill legalizationdo to thc br.rinsoi.\meric.rns dralvr into Stnte \,hethot or not vou bclieve dnrts should lri: teg,rlizcctnnd Fro\jcte druti slavcry by easv.r\'ailability? rdnsonsto support voLlraonclLrsi(nt. ' .' r) a5 .lr'l- ;r ic, a/raes We Cohsttset A8ttnents to Predict When vou consh'uctarguments, you are NmPosing and rcLatingto the world Rerisorj Somepeople will always dri!'e fasier than ihe speed limit allows, no matte|w'heiherthe limit is 55 or 65 mph. by meansof i'our ability io infer.As lou sa$'inChaPter 5, n/crf,r.Sis a thrnk- ing processthat you use io reasonfrom lvh.rt tou alreaclyknow (or beljeveto Reaso[: Car accidents are more likely to occu| at higher speeds. be the case)io form nelv knowlcdge or bcliefs lhis is usualLywhat you do Cotclrsiotti It follows that the nelvly reinstaicd65 mph limit will result in when )ou constructar8lments- You $ork from reasonsvou knolv or belicle mote acooents, in to form conclusionsbased on thesercasons. Justas you can lse inferencesto make senseol diifercnt tlPes of situaUons, so vou can also constnict nrgumc'ntsfor differ$t purposcs.In a larieq of sit- Llations,you coirstruct.lrgumentsto do thc following: We Cons?act Atg.Lfiefits to Percuaile ReasonjCh€wing tobaccocan lead to cancerof the mouth and tfuoat. " e\plain ReasonrBovs sometimes are led to begin chewingtobaccob)' ads for the prod- predict ' uct that feature sports heroes they admire. Cotlclusiorl:Thercfarc, ads for chervingtobacco should be banncd. ;\n examPle of each of these diffr'r€nt types of arguments lbllotvs After exam- ining eachexample, constrltct an arSumeniof ihe sameiyP€ relrted to issues Reasofi: in yol1l ot!-n life. We ConstructAtgumetlts to Decide R€asl'tt,Throughout my liJe,l'r,e alwaysbcen i teresiedin all cliffcrcnikinds of clectriciry" @ EvaluatinqArgu nrents Rcasori There.rre manl aiiractive iob oPportunitiesin the field of elcctrical engrneertnS. To corlstruct an effective argrmcnt yor.rmust be skilled in evaluaiing the effec- tiveness, or soundn€ss, of arguments that have alreadv been constructed. You Conch,sio":I $iU r.ork ioward becomint an electricalengineer' must investigatetwo aspectsof each argument independently to determine the soundness of the artum€nt as a whole: 1, How true are ihe reasonsbeing offeredto support the conclusion? 2. To what €xteni do the reasonssupport the conclusion,or to what extent We Coftsttlrct Argtmeris to Erploitl does the conclusion follow from the reasonsoffered? my neccledtrn emer Reason;I nas dclaveclin lea\.ingmv housebecause dog We will first examineeach of thesei{,ays of evaluatingarguments separately gcncy- tfnlking. and thm see how they work together. R?dsor: Ih€rc lvas an unexpectccltraffic lam causedb! mohrists slowill8 doh'n to riera nn olerturned chickeniruck. Co cLrsiorj Thereforc,l lras Lrtc for orlr rPPointment T!t,lll).;iaw fni,o Are ah.:Suppottiiq Reasons? 'lhe first aspectof the nrgumentvou must evaluateis the truih of the reasons that are being us!.d to support a conclusion. Does crch reason make sense? lltat e\idence is being offeredas part of eachreason? Do you knolv eachrea is in facta seriousoffense or no offcnsc.i all . fhis reasonwo uld be strength- U A ,{ rl K encdbv statinBr"Posscssjfg m.uijuana is not as seriousan offenseas armecl robbert rape,ancl murdcr, accordlngto thc overwhelminBmajoritv of legal statutesnfld judidal decisiors." Rellsd'l:Therc are m.inv other morc serjousoffcnses such nsarm€drobbery rape,and murder - for which criminalsclon't receivesuch stiff sentences. E?,al'rdfioriThc accufacyof ihis reasonis highly doubiful. It is true ihat there is lvide varidtioll in th€ sentenceshanded down for the samc offense.The sentences vary fmm state to state and also vary ivithin stales a]rd ev€n lr.ithin thc same court. Nevertheless,on the whole, serious offens€slike arned robber'',rape, and rnurdcr do receivclrrrg prison sentences. The real point he\€ js drai a filteen ve.r *rltence for posse$ing marijuana is extrumely unusual lvhen comparedr\-ith oth€.rsentmces for marijlGna possession.

Alglment 2 Rensor:Drugs posea very seriousihreat to thc young peopl{ ol our country Etaluation: As the Laterdiscussicn points out, this statementis much too vaguc. "Drugs" cannoi be frcatedas b€ing all the same.Some

Soundargument /$ Und"rstundingDeductive Arguments

We use a number of basic argument forms to organir.e,relaie to, irnd make Unsor-ndartument sense of the world. As aheadv noted, trvo of the major tvpes ol argument fofir\s are ileiu:tiDe argumetts ar.d h i ctiee ar{tmrnls. In the remainder of this chapter we will explo.e variou-s tvpes of dedudive arguments, rcscwing our Unsound argummt analysis of inductive argum€nts for Chapter 7. Invalid structure The deductire aBrment is the one most commor y associared with the study of logic. Though it has a varietv of valid forms, thev ntt share one char- acteristic: [f you accept the supporting reasons (also callcd prd, is"s) as true, Unsound argummt I ,?lid structure then you must necessarily accept the conclusion as true.

From this chart, we can sec that in tetrnsof ar8uments"truth" and "!alidiiy" have true reasonsand an in!'alid are not the sameconcepis. An drBumenican dedu(tiveargument An aryumentfon in which one reasonsfrom premises is stnicture or false reasonsand n valicl struciure ln both.ases th€ argument that arc knownor assumedto be true to a conclusionthat follo$ necessatilv L7,sor.l- To be sound, ar1argument must have both irue reasonsaj]d a 1'alid frcm these premises structlrre.For example,consider the following argument: Redso,tfFor a democracy to fundion most effecti\'clt"its citizensshould be able to thn* criiicaily about the imPortantsocial ard political issues. For exnmple,consider the followlng famous deductiveargumentl Reaso":Educattun plays a key role in developinBcritical thinking abilities. Reaso lPtemise: AII men are mortal. corch,siot; Therefore,eclucatiN plavs a key role in ens ring that a democ- rac-yis Iun.tionint most effectively. RersorlP/elftise;Socrates is a man. Conclusion:Tnere{ore, Socraies is mortal. ,A.good cas€co!ld bc made for the soturdnessof this argumentbecause the rea sons .re perslhsive ind the nrgument stractureis valid Of course,someone In this exampl€ofdeduciive thinkin& acceptingthe premisesof thc argument might contend that one or boih of the reasonsare not compLetelylru€, lvhich as true meansthat the condusion necessarilvfollo!!s; it cnnnotbc Lrlse.Nlanv illustratesan important Point about the.rr8umentsNe constructand eralunte- deductivc arguments,Iike the one just gi! en, .rre structuredds sylldg^rjs,an 21D chapter six coilst,.t'r8 n/8/,rd'ih l|'r1./sartd hls Dtdu.t irt /\r{,111.nts ZI1

argument form that consjsts of two supporting premises and a conclusion. Ihefr$t p/c,flisestates that classification (men) falLswithin classificationB There are also, however, a larSe number of ita4lld deductive forms, one of (mortal). ^ which is ilustrated in the following syllogism: Tl\e secondprcftiae slates that 5 (Socrates)is a member of classification .4 (men). ReasorlP/emis€: All men are mortal The .onaltJior? simply states what ha^snow become obvious - namelli, that S ReasonlPftttke: tate6 is a Ilrar|- (Socrates)must fall within classificationB (mortal). colclrrsioni Therefore, all men are Socrat€s Although we are usually not aware of it, we use this basic type of reasoning ln the ne\l severalpa8es, we wili briefly examinesome common ialid deduc- whenever we apply a teneral rule in the form All ,4 ii B. For instance: Pre,nG4 All children eitht years old should be in bed by 9:30 p.rd. Prerrisd: You are an eight-year-old child. Application of a General Rule Coflclusiofi:Therefore, you should be in bed by 9:30 pM.

Whenever $'e r€ason with the fom ilustrated by the valid Socratessyllodsm, Review the dialogue at the beginning of this chapter and see if you can iden- we are using the folloh'ing argument shucture: tif,v a deductive artument that uses this form. P/€"isei AI n (men) are B (motal). P'smisei S is an A (Socmtes is a man). (Socmtes Conchtsior: fheretore, S is B is mortal). Concluaioft This basic argument form is yalid no matter what terms are included. For Describe an example from vour own experience in which l.ou u.sethis deduc- tive form, Preftiss AI politicians are rmtrustworthy. Prsmise; Bill W'hite is a politician. Conclusion: T,lr.erctole,BilI White is untus$'orthy. ModusPonens

Notice again that with any valid deductive form, fwe assume that the prem- A secondvalid deductiveform that we commonlyuse in our thinking go€sby is€s are true, then we must accept the conclusion. Of couise, in this case there the name rrodrBporaB - that is, "affirming the antecedent,,- and is illus- is considerable doubt that the fust prcmise is actually true. trad in the following example: When we diagram this argument form, it becomeg clear why it is a valid Pr€'riserIf I hav€ preparedthorouthly for the final exam,then f rvill do well. way of thinking: Pr?rriseiI preparedthoroughly foi the eram. CorrclreiorrTherefore,I will do well on tl€ exam. When we rcasonlike this, we are usint the following argumentstruchre:

Prrrissj If,4 (l have preparedthoror.rgNy), then B (I will do we ). PrpmiseiA (I have prcparedthoroughly). Corrdl sion: Therefore,I (l lvill do welt).

Likcdll validdeductive forms, this form isvalid nomatterwhat specific terms areincluded. For example: 212 ch:pter5i! rdD,r,r!r,rS.4.{4,.,c u t1,r Lh)dtrS Di htLle t!tnL1t, 213

P/emiserlf the Democratsarc rble to register20 miilion nev!,voters, tl.ten rh,, di"rJdJF dt tJ,e il'ill 1{in the presidentialelection. cLtirnmg ur r\i,.t-doter. dr)d _cc if can tLrellLrI,l?e\.etr ]ou in\ Jeduch\ r d.8un-enrsthat u:c lhi. rJ ..oning rorm. Ptemise: lhe Democrats werr able to register more than 20 million new

CottcluEion: Ihercforc, the Demo:rats will ,vin the presidential election. Disjunctive5y!logism A klurth common iorm As rvith other valid a€ument forms, the conclusionwill be true f the rcasons of a valid deductive argument is knoh.n as a .riirl,lc_ t.ilt nlllogism.Ihe tcrm are frue. AJthoughthc

P/rttisei You iell me thrt you have beeninking P/enisa: If,4 (Michaelis a really Boodfdend), rhents (He wiil lend me his car). specialcare wiih vour diet. Premis": Not (He Coficlusion:ThercIctre, B won,t lend me his car) your stoftach irouble is carjsedby nervoustension. Conclistoflj Therefore,not,4 (tle,s not a realy good ftiend). To determinethe accuracyof the conclusion,we must detemine the accuracy of the premises.If thev AgairL like oiher valid reasoning forms, this form is vaiid lro rnattcr what sub_ are true, then ihe conctusionmust be true. ject rhedidlogue Jt is being considered. For instance: the begilningof this rhdptec.lndsee if vnu ian roennry.,-Re\icw dnv dectuch\ear8uments th.lt use rlxs rpdsoningtorm. Prerrise.'If Iraq h,eregenuinely intercstedin $,ortd peace, it rvould not have n ll thrse balic .rgumenr forms _ apptca rion invaded Kuwait. of d generat rulc, tlro.ir. ponctE.nod s loll,7,s,x.td disjuncli(e syllogrsm _ ,,not are tound not only in infc,r_ PretriseiIraq did invade Kuwait (rhat is, Iraq did not invade,,Kurrait). m.11,{jvervday conversations but also at morc formal levelsoI thjnkine. Thev Conclusiott:Thercfore,Iraq appeai m is not genuinelt,interested in ,,v-orldpeace. academicclisciptines, in scjeniificinquiry; in debatesonsociaiissueJ, And.elselvhere.Many other argument _both This conclusion- and any forrns deducti\,eand inductiv; othlr conclusionproduced by this form of rcason (^n- -dl)o tL e tLrmrjr .(..r)onintBy lhJ.pcnind\orrr und(r.htndjnr ing -ran be consideredaccnrate iI the reasonsare true. In ihjs cds!?the s{rc_ of tnlje \'.rv\ th:nl rr. v^u r ill beb$L

The statc is blr natDrc'clearl,vprior to the family and to th€'individual, To fully believe in somethin8, to truly undeGtand somethin8, onc must since the shole is of necessit)prior to the pari. be intimately acquaintedwith its opposite.One sho ld not adopt a cre€d ,4ristuuf,Politics by default,because no alternativeis known. Educationshould prepare siudentsfor the "teal werld" not b)' segregatingthem ftom evil brit by is researchthat strongly sug€iestsa deterrent There now sophisticaicd urging full conJrcntationto testand modify the validitl, of ihe good. {ffect lof capiial punishment]. Furthermore, the principal argument RabertBarct1, ''In Defensenf Tea&il1gRLlcisn, effect is $eak. The argumeni is thai in most juris- - atainst the deterrent Seriskt,at l Fnscislli diciions r\.herecapital punishmcnt hasbeen abolished $eni hasbeen no immediate,sharp increasein what hnd beencaPital crimes But in those jurisdictions, the actual act of ibolition lvas an insignificatt clent The inescapable conclusion is that societv secr€tly .oarts crime, needs becausefor years the death penaltv had beenimpos€d rarel)',if at atl. crime, and gains definite satisfactions from the pr€sent mishand ling of it! Common serlse- irhich descrres deference until it is rcfutcd-s(88ejts We condemn crime; 1\,epunish offenders for ib but lve need it. The c me th.1t the fear of death can deter some premeditatedcrimes, inclLrding and prmishmentrituaL is a part of our lives. We need crimesto wonder some mutoels. at, to enjoy vlcariously,to discussand speculateabout, and to publicly - Ccor.geF. W/1,CLeveland Plain-Dealer, Mdl(h 13,1981 deplore.We need cdminals to idenhfy ourselveswith, xo envy secretlp and io punish storitly.They do for us the forbidden,illegil thingswe roislr lf ihe increasedpol{er rvhich scienrehas conJerreduPon human voli_ to do and, like scapeSoatsof old, th€y bear the burdensof our displaced tions is to be aboon and not a cursc,ihe endsto r{hich thesevolitions are guili and punishment- "the iniquitiesof us a11." directedmust grotr .omnrensur.liell !vith ihe grolvth of Power to carrv -Kdrl lrIeLoLhryer,"The Ctiue oJP hishnLcnl" 216 chapter sir {:nfhr, ri,!,lrJrnk,ls Ir,d/ ,r, Srt! 217

r"", Final1hr:Lrctrhts reg.rrdlnt thc curreni safet, of.lttenpting to usethis techniquein humal1 b{ings. E1'ef if thercwcrc a compeilint casein favor of creaiinga child in ln ihis chapter\ .e have focusedn-rain11, on dec{uctivearguments, an argumerlt this manner,it wo ld have to )iicld io one fundamcntalpdnciple of boih form in which it ls claimed that the premisesconstitute conclusi!e evidence for medicalethics and poljticil philosophy- the injunction,as ii is siatedin ihe truth of the conchsion. In a corect de.lucti\.eartumeni, which is orSan- the llippoc.atic cdnon,to "first, do no harm." In addition, ihe avoidance ized into a valid deductile form, if the prcmisesare true, the conclusionmusi of physical and psycholotical harm was establishedas a siandard for L1ctruc; it cannotbe lalse. resoar.h in the Nurembcr8 Code, 19'16'19. At this time, the significant Although,|cd!.f,r. forms of reasonin8are crucial to our Lndersiandingof risks to th.rfcius nnd ph)sical well-bcingofa child cfeatedbv somaticcell the rlorld and mnking inlormed clecisions,much of our reasoningis nonde nucleirrtransplant.tion cloning ouilveigh arguablybeneficial uses of ihe ducti|e. The ldrioris nondeductive artrmeni forms are tl,picauy included under ihe general rategory of irdrrtird reasoning.tn contrastto deductive It is important io recognizethat the techniqu€thai producedDolllr the nrBuments,inductile arguments rarelv provide conclusionsthat are totally sheepwas successfulin only 1 of277 attempts.If attemptedin humans,it ccrt;in. The premisesoifer el idencein support of the conclusion,but the con- would posethe risk of hormonal maifpulaiion in the egg donor;multiple clusion docs not follo$' n€{essarii}'ftomthe premises.lve$ill erplore ihe area miscarriagesin the birth mothe' and possibly severe delelopmental of inductivc rcasoningmore fully in &e next chapter,"Reisoning Critically:" abnormilities in nny resultinSchild. Clearl-v'.the burden ofproof to justir_"- such an cxFcrimental .tnd potentiall]. dangerous techniqne falls on those who would carry out thc cxperiment.Standar.t practice in biomedic.tl ?rr,!{r'i- (:i : Its4l-, scienceand clinical care vlould ncver allo* the use of a medicaldrug or device on a humnn being on the basisof such a preliminary study and +;L HumanCloning without much additional animal research-Moreo\.er, wh!'n risks are Evaluatethe follo$ rng article whjch carctully oiamines the repercussionsof taken with an inno\.ativetheraplt the jusrificationliei; in the prospectof cloninS a human embry''o.The National Bioethics Advisory Commission trealing an illnes6in a patieru lchereas,here no patient is atrisk unlil the (NBAC) rvas establishedby PresidentClinton in 1995to provide guidance innotation is employ€d.Thus, no conscientiousphvsician or Insritutional .nd srrggestionsregardinS bioethical issues;this report details their conclu- lleview lloard should approve attempts to us€ somatic cell nuclear trans ler to create a child at this time. For th€se reasons, prohibitions are war r.hted on alLattcmpis io produce children through nucleartransfer from CLoNTNGHUMAN BETNGS* . somaiiccell at this fime. by National gioethics Advi5ory Commission A Difference oI Opinion Thcre is one basis of opposition to somaticcell nucleariransf€r cloning Even on ilis point, hol\ever, NBAC lNational BioethicsAdYisory Com on which almost everyone can agree. somatic cell is an]r cell of the [A mittecl has notrd some differenceof opinion. SomearSue/ for example/ cmbryo, fetus, rhild, or adult rvhich containsa tuLl complcmcntof two ihat prospectivepnrcnts are alreadv alloh'ec1to conceile, or to carry a setsof chromosomesiin contrasih'iih a germ ce1l,i.e., an egg or a sperm, concepiionto tenn, when thereis a signilicantrisk - or elen ccrtninty- which.oniains onlv one setof.hromosomes. During somaticcell nuclear that thc child ivill sufferfroma seriousgenetic dise.1se. Even r.hen others iransfercloning, the nucleris $'hich conialnsa full setof chromosomes think such condrict is morallv r,lrong, the parents'right to rep.ocfucti\.e - is removed from the somaticcell and transferretlto an egg cell rvhich freedomtakes precedence. Sjnce manv of the risks believedb be associ- has had its nucleus rernoved.l Thcre is I'irtually universal concern . ki w i th somntic c.'11nuclear transfer ma,v be no 8r€aterthan thoseasso somr contcnd should ' R€pfinredhoDr Cn,r,! Hrrrir !f,r!!, Rif..t !i,l K1i,',ratrl,ri r t rlf NdtDdl llrn..ri.r ,4Li!i- ridtcd with geneticdisofders, ihai s ch ckrnint be iru {ldrrsrdJ, R.chaill€, \la.yland, Junc 1997 subj(rt io no nmfc rcstrictionthar other iorms of reproduciion. And, as in any nerv and e\perimental clinical procedure,hanns can' bling and fascinating.The phenomenonof identical iwins has lntrisr.'d not be nccuratelydet€rmined until trials .1reconducted in humans.Law human cultures acrossthe globe, and thro(ghout hisiorv Ii is easy to prolessorjohn Robertsonnot€cl befor€ NBAC on Vlarch13, 1997that: understandwhy identical twins hold such fascination.Common e)(peri ence demonstrates how distinctlv different twins are, both in personalih llhcl first lransrerlhto a uterus] of a human lembrJ"ol.lone lwill and h personhood.At the same time. obser\.erscannot help but imbue occurlbcforc wo knolv \vhetherit $ill succeed.- - . lsomehave argued identical bodies lvith some expectation that identical persons occupy thereforelthat the first trarofeE are someho{ unethical. . . e\Pcn- those bodies, since body and personality remain intert!.r.ined in human the resulhng child, bccauseonc doos not know i{nrat is merltation on intuition. W'iththe prarspectof somaticcell nucleartransfercloning comes going to happen,and one is . . . possiblyleadinS to a child who could a scientlficallvinaccurate bl1t nonetheless instinctive fear of multitudes of bc disablc'dand have developnentaldifficulties . . . [But thel child identical bodies,each housing personalitiusfhat are somehowless than $,ho would Rsult would not have existedhul for the procedureat distinct,lcssuniqu€, and lessautonomous ihan usual. issuc,and lifl ihe nlteni thereis a.tually to beneiitth;rt child b'' bring Is therea moral or human in8 it into being . . . lthis] shouldbe .lassjfredis experime|titionfor ritht to a unique identih, and if so wouLdii be violated bv this manner lthe child'sl bonefit an.l thus it rould fall $'lthin recogfizedexcep of human cloning? For such somatic cell tions. . . . Wo have a very differentset d rules for experim€ntaiiorl nucleartransfer cloning toviolate a dthi to a uniqre ideniitt the relevant iniend€dk) bcncfit Ithe e\pedmentaisubje.tl. senseof identity would have io be tenetic identity, that is, a right to a uniq e unr€peatedgenome. Even with the san1egenes, two individuals But the Arliument that somatic ce[ nuclear transfer c]oning exPeri - for example,homozvtous twins - are distinct and not identical, so mentsare "beneficial" to the r€suliing child rest on the notion that it is a what is intended must be the various propertic's and characteristics that "benefit" to bc brought into the $.orld as c1]mparedto being left rncon make each individDal qualitatively unique nnd differcnt than othels. ceived and unbom. This mctaphysicalarBrment, in *hich one is forc€d Does having the same genome as another person undemine that unique to compareexistcnce rvith non-exist€'nce,is Probl('mdtic.Not onlv docsit qualitativeidentitv? require us to compare something unknorvable- non'existen{e with somethingelse, it also calr lead to absurdconclusions if tlken to ils logi- Ignorance and Knowledg€ cal cxtremc.lor example,it would suppori dle argunrentthat thereis no Along theselines of inquiry some questionwhether reproduciion using degreeof pain afld srfJerin8 that cannotbe inflicted on a chilli, provide.:t somaticcell nucleartransfcr'rvould violaie $,hat philosopherHans Jonas that ihe alternaiive is never to have beenconceived. Even the originator called a ight to i8norance,or rvhat philosopherJoel Feinbergcalled a of this ljne of analysisrcjects this conclusion. riSht to an open Iuture, or what Martha Nussbaumca11ed the quality of In addition, ii is true that the aciual risks of physicnlhaffi to the .hild "separateness."Jonas argued thathuman cloning,in which thereis a sub- bom ihrough somatic c€ll nuclear iransfer cnnnot be knoi{'n with cer- stanfial iime 8ap between the beginning of the lives Lrfthe earliel and tainty unlessand uniil researchis conductedon human beings.It is like Iater fwin, is fundamentallydifferent lrom the simultaneousbeginning of wise true thAi if we insistedon absolutetuarantees of no risk beforer,l'e the lives of homozygoustwins that occurin nature. permitted any new medical interventionkr be attemptedin hlLmnns,dris Although contemporaneoustwins begin their liv€s h,ith the same would sev€relyhamp€r if not halt completcly the iniroduction of nei! geneticinheritance, they alsobeSin their livcs or bio8raphiesat the same thcrapeutic inten-entions, including nel! methods ol tt'sponding to inl-er- time, in iSnorance of *.hat the twin who shares the same genome v,.ill bv tilit). The asscrtionthat uc should regardattemPts at human cloning as his or her choices make of his or her life. To whater.er extent one's "experimentationfor lthe child sl benefif is not Persuasi\c.. . . Senome determines one's futwe, ea(h life begins ignorant of ighat that detcrmination will be, and so remains free to choos€ a future rs are Ctoning and Individuality individuals rvho do not have a twin. In ^sthis line of reasoning,ignorance The con.cpt of creatin8a geneiicih'in, alihough scPdrirtcdin time,is one ot the effectof one'sgenom€ on one'sflliure is necessarvfor th€ sponta- .lspectof som.iic cel! nu.lear transkr cloning th.lt o\)si find both tro - neous,free, nnd authenticconstructiol of a life;nd selJ. Lhaprer 5rx LD,ndr.r,.{:eJ,,a1rr tnrn Thrui$ts 221

A later trvin created b), cloninS, Jolas .1rgues,knows, or at lL'ast Treating Peopl€ as Obiects belier'€she or she knoh,s, too ml.lchabout him- or herselt.For the/e is Somc opponenhiof somatic cell nuclear cloning fear thdt the resutting ahead), in the rvorld another person, one's earlier twin, who from the chilfuen will b€ teahed as objects rather than .rs pcrsons. This concem same genetic starting point ll.ls made thc lifc choices that are stil in the often underlies dircussionsof ryhethersuch cloning amounts to "mak- later tlvin's future. lt h'ill sccm that o\e's life has alread,vbeen lived and in8" ratherthan "begetting"children, or\r,hether the child who is cre.ted la!'ed ort by another,that one's fate is already determined,.tnd so ihe in this manner will be viewed as less than a fully indcpcndcni moral later rlvin will lose the spontaneityof autheniicdll)-crcatin8 and becom agent.In sum, r 'iI beinScloned from the somaticccll of an eristing per- ing his or her own seu. One wiil lose thc scnscof human possibilityin son result in the child bcing regardedas lessof a person whosehuman- freely creatingone's own f ture. It is tyrannjcal,Jonas clalms, for the €ar- iiy and dignit), \,!'ouldnot be full,\rrespected? .in lier t\ to trv to deierrnine.noiher's fate in this $'ay: One reasonthis discussjoncan be hard to caFtureand to articulateis And evcn if ii is a mistake to believesuch crude geneticdeterminism that cedain tem$, suchas "person/"are used clifferentlyby clifferentpeo- accordingto which one's genesdetermine one's fate, what is important ple, What is common to thesevariousvicws, however/is a shafedunder- for one's experienceoI freedom and Abiliiy to crcntca life for oneselfis standing ihat bcing a "person" is differcnt from being the manipulated whether one thinks one's future is opcn nnd undetcrmined,and so still "objeci" of other people'sdesires and expectaiions.Writes lcgal scholar to be largely determinedby one'so\,'nchoices. One might trlr io interpret Maigarct Rnclin, lonas'objeciion so as not io assume either genetic determinism,or a beli€f in it. A lat€I tivin mlght granl that he of she is noi desiin€.lto fol- Theperson is a subject,a morala8ent, autonomous and sellto\.e.ning. low in his or her earlier tlvin's fG)tsteps, but that nevertheless the carli!'r An objectis a non persorlnot trated as a self-govcrnintmoral agent. twin's Iifu would alwavs haunt lhe l.1tertrvin, standing as an undue . . . [B],1"objedification ot persons,"ive mean,roughly, "h'hat Kant in uenceon the latter's life, and shapingit in ways to which others'lives would not want us to do-" arc not vulnerable.. . - That is, to obiecti4'a pcrson;s to a':t toilards thc person rvithout for his or h€r orvn desiresor rsell being, as a thing to be valu€d 'cgard Potential Harms to Impo ant Social Valu€s according to extenally imposed standards,and to control the person Thoseh'ith gravereservations about somaticccll nucleartransfer cloning rather than to entage her of him in a mutually respectfulrelationship. ask us to imagine a world in which cloning human beinBsvia somaticcell Obiectification,quiie simpl-v,is treaiing thc child as an object- a crea- nucleartransfer were permitted and widely practiced.What kincl of peo- ture lessdescrving of respectfor his or her moral agency.Commodifica- ple, parents,and clildren would webecomein sucha world? Oppon€'nis tion is sometimes distin$dshed from objectification and concerns fear that such cloning to creat€children may distupt ihe intcrconnecied treating personsas commo.litics,incl ding treating them ns a thing that web of socialvalLres, practices, and institutions that support the healthy cAnbe exchansed,boughi or sold il1 ihe marketphcc.To thosewho vieh' growth of children. The use of such cloning iechniquesmight encourate ihe jntentional choicebv anotherof one's gcneiic makeup as a form of th€ und€sirableattitude that children are h be valued accor.lingio how nanipulation by others/somatic cell nucLeartransfer cloning represents closelv theli meet parental expectaiions,rather than lovcd lor their own a form of objectificationor .ommodification of the child. sake.In this rva)rof looking at families ;rnctprrentir& cerkrjnvalues are Somemay ctenythat objecLification is anymore n danter insomatic c€Il ai the h€art of thoserel. fionships,! aLues s uch as love, nlrturinlt loyalt), nucleartransfer cloning ihan in current practicessuch as geneticscreen- .rnd steadfastness.In..ontrrst, a rvorld in rvhich sDch cloning uere ing ot, in the future perhaps, gene thcmp): These procedurcs aim either to lvidelv practiced$.ould give, the critics clrim, implicit approtal to van- .void having a child nith a particular condition,or to compensatefor a itv, narcissism,and avarice. To these critics, changesthat undcmine Benelicnbnormalitv But to the extentthat the technologyis usedto bene- thosedeepl-v prized \.aluesshould be nfoided ifpossible..{t.r ninimum, fit the child blt tor €xample,alb\.ing earlv prevcnti\'(rmeasures lvith su.h undcsirdble.hanges should not be iostcredb! public policies.- . . phenvlketonurid,no obtectilicationof the child takespl1ce. !,,cPrer )r^ L,,ir,!rrrl I iri.1rrolJllls ^ix,rt2,: 223

lvhen such cloning is undc'rtaken not lor any prrported b€nefit of the preiudices of thos€ l\'ho construct thc melric but nlso on the sort of a chitd himself or herselt but rather to satisfy the vanity of the nucleus world thcy prcdici ihesespecially brccl persons woulci face. donor,or evcn tc,serve the needof someoneelse, such as a dyinS child in Nonetheless,at the beginnin8 of tlris centurv eugenic ideas were need of a bone marro1\'donor, then some t'ould argue that it goesyet championedby scientific and poliiical leadersand were very popular nnother step tor .ard diminishing the Personhood of thc child ceated in lvith the American public. lt tlas not until they ra.ercpmcticed in such a this fa.shion.The final insult/ opponentsargue, $/ould come iJ the child grotesque fashion in Nazi Cermany that their danger became apparent. crentedthrough somaticceil nucleartransfer is regardedassomehow less Despiiethis sordid history and the very r€al limitaiions in what geneiic than fully equal to ihe other human bein8s,due to his or her dimi,]lished selectioncorild be expectedto yield, the lure of "improvement" remains ph]sical Lmiquenessand the diininished mvstery s rrounding some ver)-.real in ihe minds of some people. In Eomervavs, crearing p€ople asp€cts of his or her tururc physical develoPment through somatic cell nuclear transfer oflers euge.nicists a much more pon ertul tool than anv beforc. In selectivcbrc€ding programs,such as the "gcrminal choice"method ur8ed by thc geneticistH. J.Muller a gen- Eugenic Concems eration aso/ the outcome depende.:lon the usual "genellc lottery" that The.iesire io improve on nature is as oLd as humankind. It has been occurseach time a sperm fcrtilizesan egg,fusing thcir individual g€netic plared out in agriculture through the breedint ol sPecial strains of heritages into a nerv individual. Clonint, bv contrast, !\.ould alloiv the domesticated animals and plants. ntth the development of the field of selcctionof a clesiredgenetic prototlpe which {'ould be replicatedin g(netics over the past 100 vears came the hope that the sele.tion of eachof ihe 'tffspring," at leaston the level of the geneticmaie al in tl're advantaSeous inherited charact€dstics- calied eugenics, from the Creek {!.geresmeaning !1cllborn or noble in heredity- could be as ben- eticial to humankind as selecri\.e breedinS in agricdture. Objections to a Eugenics Prograrn Th€ transfer of dirccted breedin8 practices fmm plants and animals to It might be enough to obiect to the institution of a pmgran of human human beingsis inherently problemaiic,hoh'ever To bedn, erSenicpro- erSenic cloning-cver ,l voluntary program thai ii lvould resi on posalsrequirc ihat severaldubious and offensiveassumpiions be made. falsescientific prenises and hcncebe wastcful and mis$rided. Br.lttl1rlt First, that most, ifnot all people wol d fiold iheir reproductivebehavior argurnenl might not be sufficient io deter those people who want to push to the eutcnic plan; in a countr,v that values reproductive fr€€dom, this th€ genetic traits of a popula rion in a Farlicu lar dir€ction. llhile ackno$ I ontcome would be L'nlikelyabsent compulsion- Second, that meanscxi6t edgingthata Particularsctofgenes can bc expressedin a varietv ofways for decidnrgwhich human traits and characteristicswouid be favorec{,an .tnd thereforcthai clonint (or aj]y other form of eugenicselection) does enierprisethat restson notions of selectivehuman superiodty that have nLrtguarantee il particular phenotypic manifesiationof the genes,ihoy long been linked ivith racist jdeology might still arSue*rat €ertaingenes provide a bettersiarting pornt for the Equaly important the whole entrPrise of "imProvint" humankind next generation than other €icnes. b!' eug€nic programs oversimptifi€s the role of gene6 in det€rmining The anslter to any who would propose to exploit the scienceof human trAits and charActeristics.Llttle is known about the correlaiion clonin8 in this way is thai ihe moral problems$'ith a pro8ram of humAn betrveengenes and the sorts of complex behavioralcharacteristics that eugenicsto far beyond practicalobjections of infeasibilitv.Some objec- dre associated r,\'ith successful and rewardinS human liresj moreovel tions are thosethat have alreadvbeen discusscdin connectionwith the lvhat little is know.n indicates that most such charactcristiG r€st t from possibledesire of individuals to usesomatic cellnuclcar transf€rthat the compljcatedinteractions amonBa number of genesand the env;ronment creation of a chlld undcr such circumstincescould resuli in the chilcl Wlile cows can be bred to produce more milk and sheePto have softer beinS objectjfied,could seriouslv undermine the valric that ought to fleece,the iden of bre€ding hum s to be suPeriorwould belong in ihe attachto eachindividual risnn end in thems€I\.es,and could ioster inap- realm of scienceficiion cvcn if one could conceiveholv to establishthe propriate efforts to contrcl thc couFe ol the child's lifc accordint to metric of superioriq, something that urns rrot oilY on the values and e\Dectationsbased on the life of the Dcrsoni{,ho w.rs cloned. In addition to such objeciionsare thosethai arisespecilica y because Questlonsfor Analysis h'hat is at issuein eu#nics is morc than just an inLlividualact; it is a col, After lective proSram. lndividual acts may be undertaken for sintular alrd reading this article on human cloning,do the foilowing: often uiknown or even unknowable reasons/rfhereas a eugenicspro- 1. Identify the argumentsthat were used,and summadzethe reasonsaJld con- gram would propaSatedogma about the sortsof people who are desir- clusion for each. able and those who are dispensable.Thai is a path thai humanity has 2. Descdbethe types of argumentforms that you identified. tread before,to its everlasinrgshame. And li is a paih towhose return the 3. Evaluaiethe frur1 of ihe reasonsihat support the conclrisionior eachof the scienceof cloning should never be allowed io even the slightesi Bive argumentsthat you identified and the rdlldity of the logicalform. supPorf.. . . 4. Imagine thai you have been askedby the president to prepare a position Cloning Is Unethical paper on human cloning ihat he carl use to shap€ ihe government's policy. Construct an extended In summary,the Commissionreached several conclusions in considedng argument regarding humaJl cloning. Be sure to include arguments on both sides the issue, the approprjatenessof public policies reSardin8the creationof children of aJld conclude with your own reasonedanalysis and conclusion-Be through somatic cell nuclear transfer. First al1d foremost, creating chil- sureto include specificpolicy recom- mendationsthat you believe the government .tren in this manner is urlethicalat this time b€causeavailable scientific should iake with respecito clonin8. evidenceindicates that such techniquesare not safeai ihis iime. Even if concernsabout safetyare resolved, however, significant concerns remain about the negativeimpact of the use of such a technologyon both indi vidrlals and society.Public opinion on ihis issue may remain divided. Some people believe that cloning thrcugh somaticcell nuclear transfer !vit1always be unethicatbecause it . . . wil always dsk causingpsycho- logical or other harms to the resulting child. In addition, althou8h the Conmission acknowled$d that there are casesfor which the use of such cloning llrighi be consider€d desirableby some people, overall these caseswerc insufficienily compelhg tojusiify proceedinglvith the use of suchtechniclues.... Finally, many scenarios of creating children through somaiic cell nuclear transfer arc based on ihe sedousmisconception that sele{tinga child's genetic makeup is equivaleni to selectingthe child's traits or accomplishm€nts.A benefit of more widespread discussion of such cloning would be a clearerrecognition that a pe$on's traiis and achieve- ments dep€nd hcavily on education, training, and ihe social environ ment, as well as on tenes. Should ihis type oi cloning proceed,however, an)' children born as a result of this techniqre should be freatedas hav- ing the samerights and moral staiusas any other human beint. ReasoningCritically Reasoning is the tvpe of thinkint that uses argrrments - reasonsin support of conclusions to decide,explain, prcdicL and persuade.Effective reasonint involvs u$ing all of the intellectualskills and critical attitudesla'e ha\.e been developing in this book, and in this chapter $,e will further explorevarious dimensionsof the reasonln€iprocess.

.a'' 'rt Ino ucrve Keasonrng

Chapter 6 focused primarily o\dedrctioe rcosonin&an artument form in lndu.iiv€ R€trrona.rq which R€asoninqfom prcmi*s artumed one re'asonsfrom premises that are known or assumed to be true to a conclu- to b€ rrue b a onclusion luppoft€d sion that follows necessarily from the p.emises. ln this chapter I\,.ewill €xam- (but mt loqi..lly) bryfte pcme5 ine ihtluctiw rensaning,an argrment form in wfuch one reasonsfrom premises that are kno(-n or assumedto be true to a ronclusionthat is srpporied b,vthe Frernisesbut doesnot follow lo$cally from them. EmpiricalG.n.r.ll.8tlon orawingcon< lsions abour a ta'set aon. udnq thalan evenl ts poFulalon bard on ob5e/v'ng rh€resu t ol anorherevant indudive reasoningAn argumentform in whih one reasonsfrom p.emises that are known ot assumedto be true to a con.lution that it suppotfud by the rsltF empk eprent iive? 1 ldenrit an runt id premisesbut does not necessarilytollow from them

I Developa theory/hypothers

When yolr reasoninductively, yout premisesprovide evidenceihai makesit more or lessprobable (but noi certain)that the conclusionis t e. The follolv- int stat€mentsare examples ofconclusions rcached through inductive reason- in8.

1. A recent Ganup poll reported that 74 perc!'nt of the American public beiieves that abortion should remain legalized. 2, On the average,a person i{ith a.ollege degreewiLl carn over 91,140,000 more in his or her lifetjme than a personwith just a hith schooldiploma. 3. In a recent survey twlce its many docto6 intewiewed stated thai iJ they were strandedon a descrtisland, they r,ould prefer tsnyerAspirin to Extra StrengthTllenol. 4. The outbreak of food poisoning at the end-oI-year school party w-asproba- bly caused by the squid s.rlad. Ihe cfltic:l lhinkels Gui

226 228 chapt€r seven Rrdsd,i,rtscriti.n]r, trtpftlinr Ltxntl:rta,

6. The solar sysiem is probably the reslLltof an enormouserplosbn - a "big Network cleciion predictions, ns well as public oPhion Polls ihat occur ban8" that occurredbillions of yearsago. throrghoui a political campaign,are based on inicrviews $'ith a selectnumber of people.Ideallt pollsters$,ould intervie\a,everyone in the trrscf The firsi three statementsare forms of inductil'e reasoningknos,n asl]rrpil fofrrrto, (in this case,voters), but this, of course,is hardly practical.Instead, they select i:nl generuIiznlion,a ge^eral statement about an entiregroup madeon ihe basis a relatileli, group of individuals from the targetpopulaiion, known as a ofobser!ing somemembers of the group.The final ihree statementsare exam- small jfl,?fle, who they have determined will adequatel),represent the group as a ples ol causalrcasaning, a form of inductive reasoningin h'hi.h it is claiDed $.ho1e.Pollsters believe that they can then gcneralizeihe opinions of ihis thai an el ent (or events)is ihe result of the occurrcnceof anoiher eveni (or smaller group to the target population. And with a few notable cxcephons €vents).We u'i[ be exp]oring the ways eachof these forms of induciive rea (such as in the 1948presidential election, when New York governor Thomas soning functions in ot1l lives and in rarious fields of siudl.. De\ re)rwent to bectbetieving he had been electedpresident and rvoke up a In addition io cxamining various ways of reasoninglogically and effec- loser to HaIIy ftumajl, alld the 2000 election, Core was briefly ti|ely, we will alsoexplore ceriair forms of reasonint that arenot loFcal and, 'hen,A.l declarcdthe presidentialr{'imer over Geor8e\\'. Bush),iheseresults archiShly as a result, are usually not effective.These rvays of pserdo reasoning(false reasoning)are often term€d/allr.,r,siarguments that are not sound becauseof There are thre. key criteda for L\aLuarint inductive argumentsl various errorsin reasonln8.Fallaciolls feasoning is tvpicallv uscd to infiuence others.It seeksto persuad€not on the basisof sound argumentsand critical ' ls the sample knol\.n? thinkint but raih€r on the basisof cmotionaland ilLolical faciors. ' Is ihe samplesufficient? . Is the sampler€presentative? lallaciesUnsound argunents that arc often persuasiveand appearingto be logicalbecause they usuallyappeal to out enotionsand prejudircs,and ls the SampleKnawn? becausethey often supportcanclusions that we want to believeare accutate An inductive argumentis or y asstrong asthe sampleon which it is based.For example,sample populations descdbed in vagueand unclearierms "highly pLacedsources" or "many l'omg peopleinte iewed," for example provide a tre:cherouslv rveak foundation for generalizint to laf8er popL ations. In '.) rmprncaI (lenera I za on order for an induciive argriment to be persuasive,the sample population should be explicjtly kt]o-.r,r1and clearly identificcl.Natural and socialscientists One of the most important tools usedby both natural and socialscientists is take great care in selectingthe membersin the sampiegroups, and this is an empirical generalization.Have yo11ever'lvondered ho$' the major telcvision important part of the data ihat is availableio outside investigatorswho may and radio nefi\'orks can accrrately predict ele.tion results hours before ihe wish b evaluateand verily the results. polls close?These predictions are madepossibLe by the power of drrllt.dl l'e,i d/dli:rfio'7,a first major type of inducti\.e reasonin8thai is defined as reason- ls the SampleSufficient? lng from a limiied sampleto a fneral conclusionbased on this sampLe. The secondcdtedon for evaluatinginductive reasoningis to considerLh€ slze of the sample.It should be sufficientlyLlrge enotgh io gire an accuratesense be empiri.algeneralization A forn of inductivereasoning in whicha general of ihe group as a whole. In the polling exampl€discussed earlier, we wouLd statementis madeabaut an entiregroup (the "targetpopulation") based on concernedifonly a few reglsteredvotershad beeninteFieh'ed, and the results (the of theseintervie$'s were ihen io a much large(population. Over- observingtone ''err,betsof the grcup "sanplepapulation") teneralized all, the lar€icrthe sample,the more reliableihe nductive conclusions.Natural and sorial scientisishave ctevelopedprecis! gujdelines for determining the Understanding the principles of empi cal teneralizaiion is of crucial silc of the sampleneeded to achievereliablc results.For examPie',Poll results irnpo.tance to effective thinking becausewe are coniinually chalienged to con- are oftcn accompaniedby a qualification such as "'fhesc r[sults are subjcctto struct and evaluate this form of inductive areument in our lives. an error hctor of13 percentagepoints.'This meansthat jf the samPlerevcals of thosc inien,icwed prefer candidatcX, then we carl reliably ihat:17 pe(ent rH r,u,;(r Jrtr: A{Trvrry shte thai 44 to 50 percentof th€ targetPoPrilation Pref.r candidateX Because IEI-, r.t a snmpl.,- u-ua'l! d ,m.rll uf he ."-Frt wF. ,rnrdrL irare Filrhon PoFulal'or' ) Evaluating lnductive Arguments that the iwo match cach othqr exactl\r- theremust ai 'avs be somProom fol 'fL variaiion. The excePiionsto ihis arc situanonsin which ihe iargei PoPulation Review the following examplesof inductive arguments.For eachargument, is completelv homogcneous.For cxampte, tasting orlc cookie lrom a bat of evaluatethe quality of the ihinking by answeringthe folowinS questions: whether or not the entle bag is stale cookies G usuallJt enough to tell us t. Is the sample known? 2. Is the sampl€ sufficimt? 3. ls th€ sample repiesentative? ls the SampleReptesentative? 4. Do you believe the conclusions are likely to be accurate?Wty or why not? The third crlrcial elemeni in effectiveind ctive redsoningis th€ ?"r/ese,xtnl,oe- ,1cssof the samplc.If we are io $'ith confidencefrom the samPieto Seneralize Link Between Pornography and Antisocial Behavior? tn a study of a the target poprilation, then we have to be sur€rihe sample is similar to the possible relationship between pornography and aniisocial behavior LrrgerBro'rplrom\!l1!chiti:drdt\nUrrll relP\'.1ntdsPe. t- l-ori-nsldnrP, in the questionnaires went out to 7,500psychiatrists and psychoanalysts whos€ polling example the sample popu-tation should rcflect the same percentage of Iisting in the directory of the Anlerican Psychological Association indi- mcn and lt omery of Dcmocrats and Republicans, of yolng and old, and so on, cated clinical experience. Over 3,400 of these professionals responded. as the target population. lt is ob\,ious that many (haracleristics,such as hair The resulr 7-4 percent of the psychiatrists and psychologists had casesin color favoriie food, and shoesize, are not relevilni to the comparisonThe bet- which they were convinced thai pomogfaphy wa6 a causal factor in anti- ier the samplereflects ihe target in terms of rdlstinntqualities, thc Population socialbehaviorj an additional 9-4 percent were suspicious;3.2 perceni bctter ihe accurac]'of the gen€ralizations.However, when the samPleis not did not cornnit th€mselves,and 80 percent said they had no casesin for cxamPle,if the election reprcsentativeof the iartct population Pollsters whjLh d cdu.dl connecrionwns \u\pedeo. interviewed only femalesbetween the agesof thirty and thirtv file - then the sample is termed l,,,rrcd,and anv generalizationsabout the tarSetPoPulation To ra'ill be hifttlly suspect. sleep, Per.hance to Die? A survey by the Sleep Dsorde/ Clinic of the VA hospital in (involvint llos do $re ensure that the sample is rePresentative of the target PoPula- La Jolla, CaliJornia morc than one miltion people), tion? One important device is rdtdon sdlecliorr,a sclectionstrategy in which revealed that people who sleq> more than ten hous a night hav€ a death rate everv mernberof ihe iargLrtpopulation has an eclualchance ofbeing included 80 percent higher than those who sle€p only seven or eighthours. in the sample.For exanlple,the various techniquesused to seleciwinning lot- Men who sleepless than four hours a night havea deathrate percent ter-vhckcts are supposedto be random- eachfiakei is supposedto ha\'e Rn 180 higher,and women with lesslthan four hours] sleephave a rate 40 percent higher I'qual chancaof winning. In comple\ casesof inductive reasoning such as This might be taken a6 hdicating ihar too much or too little sleepcauses death. t'olling random selectionis oiten combinedwith the confirmaiionthat all of the important categories in the population are ddequately represcnted. For ('xample,an electionpollster'lvould want to be cert.rinthat all significant8co_ "U.5. Wastes Food Worth Millions' Amelicans in the economic mid- graphicalareas are included an.l then K ould randomlt selectindi\-iduillslrom dle waste morc food than their rich and poor counterparts, according to N rilun 11u\..rrF,r\h, c,,mor.erh, .,,mplp. a study prblished Saturday. Carried out in Tucsor! Arizona, by Univet- sity ofArizona studentsunder the direction of Dr. William L. Rathje,the \\&en young peoptewere askedtheir beliefsabour anyihing irom tying, study analyzed 600 bags of garbage each week for three years from siealing,and using drugs to aborion or rcasonsfor choosinga job, these lower-, middle-, and rpper-income neighborhoods.They found that city rudimentary ethicalsystems or,,moral compasses,,tumed out to bemore residentsthrow out around 10 percent oi the food they took home - rmportant than the background factorsthat sociatscienrjsts habihrally about 9,500tons of food eachvear. The figure amounts to 59 to mil favor in $11 their searh for explanations,like economicstatus, sex, race, anl lion north of food. Most of the wasteoccurred in middle classneiilhbor evenreligious praciice. hoods.Boih the poor and the wealtht, were si$ificantly more frugal.

One in Four British Couples Regret Marriage One in four British mar- ried couplesrcgret the day they tied the knot, a national poll condu{ted /-l for Reatlets Drsestmagazine sho{'ed. Middle-aged couples were five times more likely to dream of havinS a dog rather than fantasize about Designingporl having an affair Fody four percentof r{omen sufleyed admitied having fI a a secretthey lvould never teli thetuhusband, against percent sr'le(| in r..||e L, 39 of men. th"r) ou h,,uU to f,^ d Sroupni p, npteabnrt forer,r,r rhe Some22 percentof men rnder 45 r{,antedtheir wives to be more affec- nre Fop rr,'rionufvor. or)uu. reishb.-ho.d DF.orbei1 _p^(,hL terms how -hc,, tionate, and ilO percent lvantecl to spend morc time with their wives. you woriid go about constructinga sampleboth large and repre "Men want to talk more - we'd ahvaysthoughi ii was women," ihe edi- sentativeenough for yor io generalizethe results io the tar$i popdation tor-in-chief of Rrddel's Digesl sajd. "The state of marriage in Britain in 2002is puzzling and contradictort" he added.

Young People's Moral Compass A recent suvey of 5,012students fallaciesof FaiseGeneralrzatron ftom fourth grade through high school yields important insights about @ how youJlgpeople make moral d€cisions.Asked how they decide Althor,gh 'ould 8ererdli,,ingdrd Inreryrerirgdrc Letut :n r^.min8l:,,n, epl_. rhe) whai to do if "unsure of what $'as dght or wrong in a particular situa- .u.d1 . sr\ e I i.e to ldlln.iou-w,r\: ot thintints irc uLti.rBrt-F t.ttow:n8: tion," these were the responsesand how they were desc bed by ihe . Hasty generalizaiion . . 23 percent said they woldd "do what was best for everyone Sweepinggeneralization involved," an orientation the researcherslabeled "civic humanist." . Falsedilemma ' 20 percent $'ould "follow the advice of an authority, srch as a par- eni, teacher,or youth leader" - "conventionalist." Hasty Generalization 18 percent oI respondenissaid they would do what would make ' Consider the following exanples drem"happy" "expressivist." of reasoning.Do you think that the argr_ mcnts are sound?Why or why not? ' 16 percent would "do $'hat God or Script res" sav "is right" - M)' "theistic." boyfriends.havenever shown anv real concem for mv feetings.N,II concllrsionis thai 10 percent lvould "do what rvould improre their orvn situations" men are insemiti\ e, setfish,and ' ficial. "-ori.""tfy "rp", - "uiiliiarian."

9 percent did noi know, and 3 percent\,vroie that they lvould fol- Ml mother ' ahvaj,s gets uFset over insignificant things. This leads me ro low their "conscience-" Li€'llevethat women a(e !.ery emotional_ on ln both of thesecases, a Seneralconclusion has beenreached that i5 based "Vigorous exercise contributes to overall good hcalth, e.rc.?f/b/ rccent heart a very smal l samPle As a result, the RrasonsProvide veD' s eaksuPPort for thc attacklictims, p€oplc out of shape,and women ilho are about to Bive birth." conclusionsthat arebeing del eloPed.Itlust doesnot rrake Soodscnse to g$1' Sweeping gcneraljzationsbecorne dangcrous only r''hen they are accepted eralize from a ferv inclividuals io d[ men or all rtomen Th€ conclusionsnle without critical an:lvsis and reformulation. ,raslvbecause the samPlesarc not large enough and/or not rePres€ntatiYe Revi&v the folo$ing examplesof s*.eeping Seneraliz.ltions,and in cach (a) (b) cnouth io provide adcquateiustification for the generaliz'tion case explain arly ii is a s$'eepint genernlizationand reformdate the Of.ourse, manv gcncfalizaiionsare nroro warranted than the two grven statementso that it becomesa legitimateSeneralization. that is lnrgerancl more rep- here becalrsethe concLusionis basedon a samPle 1. A collegeeducation stimulates you to de(clop as a pe6on and prcparesyou for €xample: resentatileol the SrouPas a lrhole- for many professions. Thereforc, all persons should atten l college, no mat ter rrhat careerthey nreinteresied in. a lot of researchln a variety (tf automotivePubli'niidN on the i have dore 2. Drugs such as heroin and morphine are addictive and thereforequalify as relationshipbetwoen ih€ size ol carsancl thc gas mile'lge thev Set rn 8€n- danSemus dru8s. This means that thev should nevcr be used, even as it makes s€nseto.oncludc !h't Largecars tend to tet fcwer !'ral, I think painkiltersin medical situations. miles gallon than smallcr cars Per 3, Once criminalshave seived time for the.rimes they hal'e committed,they have paid their debt to societvand should be permrttedto work at .rnv job In this (aso,ih€ con.lusion is Scnefalize(lfrom a larger anclmore rePresentn- thev choose. tive sample than those in the preceding ti{'o arguments As a r€sult' the reason for the list argrment provides nruch strongersuPport for ihe conclulion FalseDilemma t r' e! p in.l Ge n e r a I i z a ti on The fa acy of the/alse dilrrrna - also known as thc "either/or" falary or the "black-or $,hite" fallacy- ocmrs when we are askedto choosebetr\:ecn hro Whereasthe fallacv of hnstv generalizatiof deals$iih e(rorsin the Processof extremealternatives without being able to consider addliional opiions. For generaliring,the iall,lcy of s.r.'cfiig,qcr.rdii: fio' focuseson difficultiesin thc exampl€,we may sa, "Eiiher you're for me or againstme," meaning that a ol int'.pr.trng Considet the follo!'-ingexamPics of reasoningDo vou 1..*""" choice has to be made befi{een these altematives. Sometimes giving people that the argunrentsare lioutull lth{ or why not? think only tw'o choiceson an issuemakes sense ("If you decideio swim thc English Channel,you']] either make it or you won't"). At other iinles, however,vie!,r- Vigorouscxercise contributes b o\ eralL health Therehne,vigorous liood int situations in such exteme terms may be a s,eriousovcniimplification for exerciseshould b('Practicedbt recenthcnn attack victims, PeoPlc$'ho it would mean \.ie$ing a complicatcd situation in terms that are k)o simple- ar€ ort of shaPe,dnd women who are.lbout to give birth The following statementsare eramples of falsedilernnas. After analvzing the fallacy in each case,suSgest diff€rent aiternativestharl ihose beinB pre' P€opleshoLrl.tbe allowed to make their olln decisions,Proliding that their to com- actionsdo not harm other PcoPle Therefor€,PeoPle w ho arc tq'inB mit sricide sho ld be left alone b do what thev rlant Example:"Eperyone h1 Cemlanyis a Natil,nl Sa(idlist- the feil o tsidelhe ptttt! nreeitller lllj't,/s or idiats.' (AdolfHilkr, Ltuotldlry tlc Neh' York Times, been hr both of these.ises, Seneralizntionsthat ,ue true in most caseshave Atrril5,1938) deliberntcl)'aPPliL\t to instancesthat arc clcnrly intended to bc exccPtionsto the gener.riizaiionsbcc;use of sPecialfeaturfs that the exceptionsPossess Of A alysis: Thisis tm o|trshnplifitatiolt.Hitbr is stiyingtlnt ifVoL!dre flot e Nnzi, cor',rsc,thc use of srveepinggrnernlizations stimulaks Lrsto clarif, the Sener- lhe1lyo nft a lrnntic or on rliot. Bll thnititlsthe pp lntiallto theseglo ps,I'Iitltr alization, rephrasingii io e\clude instancts,like ihose givcn here' ihai have i)nssitlllt iqnoritl9dll ttu pe(,pleuha did at qrnlify as Nnzis,lLr ttics,.r iliats. \pocial features.For er.rmPle the first gener,lliza tion (ould be reformulatedns 1. America - love it or l€ave itl TheScientific Method not 2. Shc loles me; she loYesme Causalre.soning is atso the b:rckboneof thc maturaland socialsciencesi it is 3. Live free or die. rcsponsiblefor ihe remarkableunderstanding of our worLd that has been (Eldridge 4. If you'rc not part of thc solotion, thcn vcu're Pari of ihe problcm nchieved.The scierlltc, tlcd works on the assumptionthat the world is con Cleaver) structed in a complex web of causal relationshipsthat can be discover€d o$'n ol'leor yoLlwant to' through systemdiic invesiigation. Scientisis have devise.l an organized 5, lf you kno!\ about BNI ', you either approachfor discoveringcnusal relationships and testingthe accuracvol con- clurions. The sequen.eol 5tepci\ ,rsfolloh\: 1. Identify an event or a relntionship ''il,r"Causal Reason ing bdween €ventsto be investigated. 2. Cather information about the event (or events)- of inductive reasoningis r"drrr'l a form h hich 3, Devrlop a hypothesisor theory io Asecond maior t)'Pe '?dsOni':], explain whai is happening. an event (or evcnts) is clajme(l to be the result of the occurrenceof anoiher 4. Testthe hvpothesisor theorv through e\perim€niation. 5. Eralu.rtethe hypoth$is or theory b.isedon experimentalresults.

How doesthis sequencework r{'henapplied to the situation of the rough- runninS engine mentioned earlier?

causafreasoningAfom of inductivereasoning in whichan event (or events) 1. lde tifv an eoentor d rehttio ship betzaeeneoe ts to be inoestignted,In (ot is clained to be the resultaf anotherevent event, this cise, the eveni is obvious- vour car's engineis running poorlt and vou rvant to discoverthe caus€of the problemso that vou can fix it. 2, Gather itlfomnti on tibo t the toent bt eaenf'. fh is srepinvoives locating anv reletant information about the situatlon ihat lvill help sotvethe proF norld vou live lem- You initiate this step by askingarld trvingto answe! a vari€ty ofques- As yorr us€ ]iour thinking abilities to try to unde6tand the tions: When (tici ihe enginebefjin ftmning poor]y? in, vou often.lsk ihe qrtestion "Why did that haPPen?"For ex'mPle, if the Was this changeabrupt question is "\{hat's or gradual?When did thc car last havea tune up? Are thereother mechan- cngine of ,vour car is rlLnning ro(ghl!', y.rur natriral ical difliculties that might be nrlated? Has nn'.thing rvrong?'' lf n'ake up one moming with an uPset stomach, usually ask unusuat occuffed with -vou -\ou the car recently? vo.r.s-"]f,"Whuf" the.ause?" Or maybe the softball team you belong io has teen losingrecently.You typicall)' $onder, "What'sgoing on?" ln eachol thcse 3. Dett'lop d hVpothesisot thtory to eqJlainultat is ttappe"ing. After reltew- ing casesyou issume that there i5 some factor(or factoIs)resPonsible for $hat is the rele\.ant information, you will want to identify the most tikety explanAtion occuriing, some cdrrseior causes)that resultsin ihe.fi'ct (or effects)vou nre of what has happenccl lhis possibleexplanation is known as (A obsen ing (the rolrgh engine,the uPsetstomach, the losing team) a h:lpathesis. llcoly is normally a more compl€x mod€t that involves a numbcr of interconnected Causality is one oi the basic Pattcrns of thinking we us€ to of8anize and hypothcses,such as the theory of quantum make sensc of our crPeri$1ce.For inst.rnce,imatine horv bcwildcred you mcch.tnicsh physics.) would feel if a mechaniclook€d ai lour car.nd iold you therewns no exph_ natlon for the poorl,v rurming engine. Or srpPose ]'ou 8o to the doctor with an uFset sbmach, he cxaminesyou and then concludesihdt there is no Postiible hypothesisA posslb/eexplanation that is introducedto accountlor a setof fa.6 causalexPlanation for the maladl' ln eachcase I'ou ould be Lmderstanclabl)' and that.an be usedes a basisfot furthet investigation skepticalof the diagnosisnnd vlould Probablys€€k another oPinion- E onotlty: Th.ehlpoth('sis should not be Lrnnecessnrilv ';1' r i .il :{ ! .1 a: complcx- The explanntion thdt vour enginc.lifficl t! is the result oi saboragebr. an urrriendlv neighboris possiblcbut unlikel\| Thercaresimpler and more direci explanationsyou should test first.

Prcdi.tiue poluer: lhehypothesis should attow yolr to make variouspre- dictions to testits accwrlcy.If the "r\ ater in ihe gas,,h,-Pothesis is accu- rate,tou can prcdict that rernovingthe rvaifr from thc gas tank and gas linc should clcar Lrpihc clilficoli):

4. Tbstthe lrypothesisor thcory thturyh euerhnentatio,r. Oncevou identif! a hy_pothesrsthat meets these three guid€lines, the n('\t task is ro de\.ise an e\pcriment to test its accurac!..Il1 tl1€case of vour troubled car tou tvould test your h\,pothesisbv poluing severalcontainurs of,'L]r\, gas,,into rhe innk,blowing orLtihc tas iine, nnd cleaningthe carburetor Bv removingthe moisture in the gas system,you should b€ able k) determinervhethcr yoLrr Lrypothesisis correct.

5. E.,alunte the hypothesis or theory based on erpci,fle tal /.srtfs. AIt€r re\ ie$ing the resultsol vour experiment,volr usuallv can assessrhe accu, r.r.v of Iour hvpothesis.lf the engineruns smoothlvnftcr you remo\.emois- CuringDisea5e ture from the gns line, thL'nthis strong evidcncesuFporrs rour hlrpothesis. If thc crlginedoes rrotrun smootNy after vour efforts,then this persuasn . Thervomrn in thephoto on the left is anAIDS paticnt living underquaiantine c evidencesug8ests that your As dcpiciedin thephoio on ihe dght,many thousmds of s.iennstsaround ihe hypothesisis not correct.There is, howerer, a possibilit"r ivorld areactively seeking .urcs fo. a *ide ringeof humanillnesses, if,cluding third Removing the moisrure irom rhe Bas svstem mi8hr Alm, iheplngueof oft timcs.Do you know inyoncwho is engagedin improfe the enginc'spcrformance som€what bui llot entirely.In that case diseaserelated res€Alch? lou m1ghtwa'ri to consiructa r&J/s.,?htpothesis nlong the lines of,,rivater in the Bassvsiem is partially responsiblefor mv rouBh-running€ngine, bui it Although )'orr hyPothesismay be suSSestedby the informaiion you have, anothercause (orcnuses) might be involv€d as rvetl.', goesb€).ond the information .ls $ell and so must be testedbcfore vou (ommit yourself to it. ln this cas€ th€ h'?othesis vou might settle (m is "water in the lf the evid!'ncedoes ll(lt support vour hl porh€sisor supporrsa revisedver gas."This hypothcsiswas suggestedby your rucollectionthat the enginctrou- sion of ii, you then beBinthe eniire processagain bv iclentifyingand testinga blesbe8an ri8h t after you bought gasin the Pouring fain This hyPothesis may rrrv hvTorhL.r.The r.,turalar-d dl ., ,eni\\ pngagein .)r.urg^i'1g proce\\ be corrector ii nlay be incorrect- you have io test it to lind oui -o, of devcloping theoriesand hypothesesand tesiing them ihrough experimen- When you devisea plausiblehvPoihesis to be tested,you should keePthree tAl dcsign. Xlnnv theorics and hvpoihesesare mu(h nrore complex than our generalguidelines in mind: "nroisturcin the gas" e\ample i nd take lrearsof gener,lting,reiising, and test The hvpothesisshould offecti!'elyexPlain ihe eveni ing. Detcrmining ' Expla atory pouer: th€ subitomic struciureof the universeand findins c r€sfor vou arc inlestigatinS-The hypothcsisthat damagedwindshield wiPers (arious kinds of cancers,for example,halc beenthe subjectsof countlessthc are ca[sin8 thc t'ngine problem doesn't sc('m to Provide an adequnte eries and hvlmtheses, as r!.ell ds experiments to test th('ir accuraca.t{e might crplanation of the difficulties. Llr.lgr.,mlhis ,'pFr.,li, 'n ,,1lhe sci, nrifi. p.o,,,s ,r. t,,llurrs .-, Predictions i.r1{l{irj{: \.'-r ,r\tt a.4 ^fffifl f'L EvaluatingExperimentalRerult3 Theory/ Experimental Read the fo[o&'ing experimental situations. For each situation hvpothesis tesrtnt 1. Describe the propos€d causal relationship (the theory or hypothesis). ../ 2, Evaluate a. The r€pres€ntativenessof the sample Information b. The randomnessof the division into experimentaland control groups Acceptance,r€lectiory or revision 3. Explain how !!ell the experimentalresults support the proposedtheory of the theory/hyPothesis or hypothesis.

Counseling May Diminish Chance of Heart Attack A study released 'rHtiuKlruc acTlvlTY t't last week indicatesthat Type A individuals, who are charactedstically impatient, competitive, insecure,and short-tcmFered,can halve their Applyingthe ScientificMethod chancesof having a heart attackby changingtheirbehavior with rhehelp of psychologicalcounseting. one of the rollowingrrtudLlons or describea situationof )nur o\^n SeLect In 197& scientists at Mt. Zon Hospital and Medical Center in San Then analyze the situation by lvorking through the various stePsof choosing. Fmncisco and Stanford University School of Education began their study method lGted direcd,v after. the scientific of 862 prcdominand)' male heart atta.k victims. Of this numbei,592 . S(uahon l: You w.rle up in lhe mominS with an uPsetstomach' received group cours€lin8 to ease their Type A behar.ior and improve their self-esteem- After three years, only 7 percent had another heart . 2: Your h.r\e bPcndectidnt all semester' Situahon Srades attack, compared with 13 percent of a ma tched group of 270 subjects l\'ho . Situation 3: (Your own choosing) receivedonly cardiologicaladvice. Amon8 328men who confinuedwith ihe counselingfor the full three years,79 percentreduced their Typ€ A or a rclatio1lshiPbehDeen eaents to be ifiDestigrka' 1, Identilg afl eoefit behavior.About half of the comparison was similarly ableto slow you haYeselected Btoup Describethe situation down and copebetter wiih stress. 2. Gatlrcr infot't ation abo t the eaefit (ot eaerfs).Elaborate the situation by provjding additional details.Be sure to include a variety of possibl€ Moriality Shown to Center Around Birthdays A new studt basedon cnusesfor the event (For example,an uPsetstomach might be the result 2,745,149deaths ftom natural causes,has found that men tend to die just of food poisoninS,the flu, anxiety,etc ) before their birthdays, lvhil€ women tend to clie iust alter their birthdays. 3, Deoelopd theory or hlpothesis to eryIdin luhat is haPpeftins'Based on Thus an approachinSbirthday seemsto prolong the life of women and ihe information you have des{ribed,ideniify a PlausiblehyPothesis that precipitatedeath in men. The stud, published in the joumal Psl/.&oso (a) expiains what occured, (b) is clear and direct, and (c) leads to pre- fiatic Medicine, found 3 per.ent more deaths than expected among dict )ns that can be tested. womm in the week after a birthday and a slight decline the $'eek before. For men, deattB peaked just before bithdays no rise 4- 'test the theory ot hypothesisthrough (\p?ritt?r'fdtto't Desi8n'r lviy ot and sho$'€d above testing your h,vPothesisthat reiults in evidence Provint or disProving it- normal afterward. S. Eoaluatc the ttrcory ot hyy'ofrtesis. D€'scribe the rcsults of your exPeri ment and e\Plain whelher lhe |esult\ ledd vou to accept,rcic.l or re|i'e few P€ople Get Sufficient Sleep Expertsin sleepbehavior and slee'p !.our hvDothesis. disorders have found that a majoriiir of people are sleepingat least an hour to 90 minutes lesseach night t'1ar they should,based on a seriesof creamcheese to smell or che$',bui noi s!vallor,{.Some who chewedalso studies of severalh ndred collc8c and graduaie studentsbet\^.een the wore noseplugs, so ihat thev could not smell the food-lust havinScream agcs of 18 and 30. In one representaiiveexPeriment with yorn8 aduits cheesein the mouth, whether subicctscould smell it or not, led to $'ho were generallyhealih)' and got an averageof sevento eight hours increasedlevels of blood fat. N1€relysmelling the cheesedid nor. Ilie sleepa night, sleepresearchers discovered ihat 20perceni of theseappar- only explanation left, researcherssav, is that the tongue can perceivea cntlv normal students could fall asleeP alrnost instanlaneouslv through- flavor in fat. out the da' if alloi\.ed to lie dolvn in a clark€ned room, evidence that thev were sleep deprived. Research€rsfurther discolered th;it even the stu_ denis who seemedalert and did noi quickly fall asleepunder test condi .-) Lausal Fallacres iions could bencfit from more sLeep.Ifthey spentone week Settingtobed an hour to 90minutes earlier lhan usual,the studentsimProled their Per- Becausecausality plays such a dominant role in the way rve rnakesense of th€ tbrmancemarkedly on pst'chologicaland coSnitivetests. world, it is not surprisin8 that peoplemake man\ misiakesand erforsin judg- ment in trying to d elermine causal relationships. The follor' int are some of the A short€r Life toJ Lefties A survey of 5,000 people by Stanley Coren most common fallacies&csociat€d with causalitv: found that whilc 15percent of the population at a8e 10was left-handed, qrestionable ' cause there as a pronounceddrop-off as penplegrerv older, Ieaving 5 percent . among s0-year-olLlsand lessthan 1 percentfor thoseaged 80 and above. MisidentificationoI the cause \\here have ail the lelties gone?They seemto have died. Leftieshale a . Poslhoc eryo propttt hoc shorterlife expectancythan righties,by an a\'€rageof 9 vcarsin the 8en- eral population, .rppaJentt!' due to thc ills and accidents they are mor€ ' Slippery slope tikel]' to suffer by having to li!'e in a "right-handedworld." QueJtronab/eCause Alzheimer's and Aging The famous"Nun Study" Nuns Offer Cluei to The fallacy of {r/?sti0rrblccll se occurswhen someonepreserlts a causalreLa- is consideredby expertson aSingtob€ one of the most innovativeeffotts tionship forwhich no real evidencecxisis. Superstiiious beliefs, suchas "Iflou to anslverquesiions about l\'ho 8€tsAlzheimer's disease and why. Siudy- breaka mirror,yor.r willhaveseven yearsof bad luck," usually fall into this cat- ing 678nuns at sevenconvents has shown that lolic acid may help stave egor;,- Some people feel that astmlogv, a svstcm of beliefs tying one's person- ofJ Alzheilner's disease, and that earty language ability may be linked to alitv and fortunes in life to the porition of the planetsat the moment of birth, loi\,'er risk of Alzheimer's bccause nuns n'ho packed more ideas into the nlso falls into this caiego$r sentences of their early autobiographies rvere less likely to gei Consider the followin8 passagefrom St. Augustine's Corfi,sslors.Does it Alzheimer's diseasesix decadeslater, Also, nuns who exPressedmore seemto support or deny the causalasseriions of astrology?Why or rvhy not? positi\'e emotions in their autobiographleslived significantly longer- those fewer positive in some cases10 yeafs tonger-than expressing Firminus had heard from his father that lvhen his mother had beenpreg- nant with him, a slave belonging to a friend of his aather's was also about to bear It happencd that since the two women had their babies at the same On the Tongue, Fat Passer Tarte Test Researchersare proposing a instant th€ men were forced to cast exactly the same holoscopefor €ach new entry to ihe list of tastes,likesweetand salty, ihai the tonguecandis_ newbom child down io the last detail, one for his son. ihe other for the lii- celn. It's callecl fat, and it appebrs to have a flavor of its own. The tle slave.Yet Firminus, born to wcalih in his parents'housc, had one of the research€rsdid .rn expedmentin hich sLrbjectsr,'ere aLlowed to tastefat more ilLusttiouscareets in life r,!hereas the slave had no illeviaiion of his or smeLlit, or both, but not eat it. The subjectstvere given crackersrvith liie's burden. include gir.en Other examples oi thrs falacv cxplanations lil(e those by tour l've alwavs reckoned that Iooking at the new moon over your lefr shoulder "the teenth-.entury sutferers of the bubonic platue who claimed that Jews are is one of the carelessestand foolishestthings a body can do. Old Hank poisoninS the Christians' $'ells." This was particularlv nonsensical since an Bunker done it once, and bragged about iU and in less than two yea6 he got equal percentage of Je*s were dying of the plague as well. The evidence did drunk and fell off a shot to$'er and spread himsetf our so that he *.as iust a not support the explanation. kind of layer . . - But a4.!r.ay, it all come of looking at the moon that wav, like a fool. Misidentification of the Cause Can you identify any of your o 'n superstitiousbeliefs or practicesthat might In causalsituations we arenoi always certainaboutwhat is causingwhai - in havebeen the result ofpost lDc thin-king? oiher words, rvhat is the causeand what is the effcct.MisidentifJitlg the ca seis easyto do. For example,lvhich are the causesand which are the effectsin ihe following pairs oI items?why? SlipperySlope The ' Povedy and alcoholism car,rsalfalacy of s/ippelyslope is illusrraiedin the following adl,ice: Headachesancl tension ' Don't miss that first deadline,because if you do, it won'r be lon8 befor€ . Failure in schooland personalproblems you're missingall vour deadlines.Tlis.lvill spreadio the rest ofyour IiJ€,as you will be late for every appointment. This terminal procrastination will Shyness and lack of confidence ' ruin your career, and friends and relarives will abandon you. you will end up a lonely failure ' Drug dependenc]' and emotional difficulties ivho is unable to ever do an),thingon time. Of course, sometimes a third factor is responsible for both oi the effects we Slippery slope thinkinS asssts that one undesifable action wilt inevitablv lead are eaamining. For o(ample, the headaches and tcnsi(m we are experiencing to a worse action, $'hich ftill necessarily lead to a worse one still, all the lvay may both be the result of a third element - such as some new medication \t€ down the "slippery slope" to some terdble disaster at the bottom. Although are taking.wh€n this occurs,lve aresaid to commit the fallacyof,lzotns d.orr this progession may indeed happen, the€ is certainly no causal gxarantee no, .ar6e.There also exists the fallacyof assxming a conntoncausr for exam that it will. Cr€ateslipperv slop€sc€narios for one of ihe following $.amjngs: ple, assuming that both a sore be and an catache stem from the same cause. ' lf ,,ou g€t b€hind on one credit card paymcnt . . . PostHoc Ergo Propter Hoc ' lf vou fail ihat first tesi . . . The translationof the Latin phrase ,os, lroa0/80 f/optel loc is "Afier it, there- . If you eat thai first futtge square. . . fore becauseof it." It refers to those situationsin which, becausetwo things Review the juEt occur closetogether in time, we assumethat one causcdthe other.For exam- causalfallacies describedand then identify and explain rhe reasonint pitfalls ple, if your team wins ihe galne eachtime you wear your favodte shirt, you illustraied in ihe following examples: mjght be tempted io concludethai the one elent (wearingyour favoriteshi ) The person who won th€ loitery savs that she dreamed the winning has some influence on the other event (winning the game).As a result, you numbers.I'm going to start writing down the numbersin my drearns. might continue to wear this shirt "for good luck." It is easy to s€€how dris sort Yesterdav I of mistaken thinking can lead to all $orts of superstitious belietu. forgot to tak€ mv vitamins, and I immediatelv got sick. Thar mistake Consider the causal conclusion a$ived at by Mark Ttvain's fictional cllarac- won't happ€n again! ter Huckleberr.vFirn in the following passage.How would you anallze the t m warning you - if vou start missing cl.rsses,it won't be long belore conclusion that he comes to? (ou flunk out of schooland ruin vour future. . Advedisersiell us ihai usint this detergent1^,i1l leave oul wash "cleaner irt5it ai.t Y :.{1.{{K!:lic than clcan, w,hiter than lvhite." . Doctom tell us that eatinga balarlceddiei will result in beiter health. . Educaiorsiell us that a coliete degreeis lvofih an averageoI91,1.10,00{l additional incomeover an lndividual's life. . Scientistsinform us ihat nuclearener8v $,ill result in a betterlife for all. In an effort to persuadeus to adopta ceriainpoint of view, eachof theseexal]r- ples makes certain causal claims aboui how the {.orld operates.As cdtical ihinkers, it is ou| dufy io evahratethese various causalclaims in an effort to figure out whether ihey aresensible ways of organizingihe world. Explain how ]'ou might go about evaluaiingwhether eachof the following causalclaims makes sense: hahple: Takingthe tight dtatninsuill imprc?ehealth. Ez)al atioft: Re',ieu,the medicnllesedrch that examinesthe efect of t,lking..)itd, minson heaLth)speak to a nuttitioniet;speak ta a dactor. . SweetSmell deodorant 1{ i]l keepyou drier all day lon8. . Allure perfume rvill causepeople to be attractedto you. 5lipping and Sliding . t The falla.y oi slppery slope stggests ihat one undesirabl.action $'ill ineviiably Natural childbirth will result in a nlore fulfiiling birth c)ipeience. lead to others,taking )'ou down the "slippe.v slope" to someunavoidable terrible . Aspidn Plrc r ill give vou faster,longer-lasting relief ftom headaches. disasierat thc bottom.Can yo! thint of an examplein i{hi.h vou have used ihis . Lisieningto loud music rvil damaSeyot1l hearhg. kind of thinking ("If you continue to -, then thingswjll get Prcgressivety worse untll you ultimately find loursclf -")? lvhai aresome straiegi.s for clinfying this sort of faila.ious thinking? r'& fallacies of Relevance

Many fallacious arSumentsappeal for support to factors ihat have little or nothing io do with the argument being offered. ln these cases, false appeals . I ahvavs take the first seatin ihe bus Today I took anotherseat, and the substitutefor sourrdreasoning and a critical examinationoI the issues.Such bus broke do$'n. And vou accuseme of being superstitious! appeals,knownas/a/ld.teso/rcldra.e,includethefollowinSkindsoffallacioris thinking, are Sroupedbv similadty into "Ialacv famjlies": . I think the teasonl'm not doing rvell in schoolis that I'm just not intef- '\hich . Appeal to authodiy ested.Also,I simPly don'i hat'e enoughiime to siudy . Appeal to tradition Man], people'ant us to seethe causeand effectrelationships that theybeliev€ . Bandwagon exist,and thef/often utilie questionableor outriShi fallaciousreasonins Con- . Appeal to pity sider the folloil ing clamples: . Appeal to fear e Politiciansassure us thatavote for them wlll rcsultin "a chickenin every . Appeal to flattery pot and a car in everv ijatrge." . SpecialpleadinS 2.18 chapt€r seven rv,sdrtrrs ( 'r.nrt

. Appeal to ignorance Appeal to Tradilion . Beggintiihe questiof A mcmber of the samef.lllacy f.rmily as appeal to authotity,appcal ta lrcdition . Straw mall drglresthat a practiceor way of thinking is "better" or "ri8ht" sin1plybecause . ttc.l herrint ii is dd€r itis tradjtional,or it has"alh'ays been done thatway." AlthouShtra- ApPeal to personalattack ' ditional b€liefs oftel expr$s some truth or $.isdom- for example, "Cood . Trvo wrongs make a right nutrition, exercise,and rctular medicalcheck ups are the foutdation of good health" - traditional beliels are often misguided or outright false. Consider, for example, the belief that "intcntional bleeding is a source of tood healrh ApaPal ro Authorify becaus€ it lets loose evit vapors in the bodv" or traditional practices like tric, torian ribrrushing corsetsor Chinesefootb'ndinB. How do we tetl which tra- ways in In Cllapter-1,"Perceilin8, BelievinS,and KnowinB," !\'e exPloredthe ditional befiefsor practiceshave merit? ]\'c need to think critically,evaluaring our whjch we someiimesdppeil ta aulhotitieslo establishour beliefsor Prove the value basedon inJormedreasons and compellingevidence. Criticallv eval, points. At that time, e noied that to se e as a basis for beliefs,authodiies uate the follolving traditionalbeliefsl musthave lcgitimateexpertise in the areain which they areadlising- like an . Sparethe experienc€dmechanic diagnosing a problem wiih yout car PcoPle,however, rod and sFoil the child. often appeai to atthorities who are not Llualifiedto give an exPertoPinion . Children should b€ seenand not heard. Consicterthe reasoning in the fotlolt'ing advertisem€ntsDo you think the . argumentsar€ sound?lVhY or whY not? N€ver tal(e"no" Ior an nnswer. ' I was al$'a)'s taught that a woman's place was in the home, so purcuing Hi. You'r.e prcbably s€en me out on the footbau field. After a hard day's a career is out of the qucstion for me. work crurhing halfbacks and sacking quarterbacks, I like to settle down . with a cold, smooth Maltz b(lr' Realmen don't cry - that's the way I $rasbrought up.

SONY Ask anYone. Bandwagon Over 11million women lvill rcAd this ad Only 16 ltill own the coat loiring ihe illogicaLappeals io authority and tradition, the fallacy Dnadaragor relies on the uncriiical acccptanceof others' opinions, in tltis casebecause Each of theseargtments is intend€d to Pcrstade us of the value of a Ptociuct "evervon€believes it." Pcopleexperience this allthe time thror.lgh"peer pr€s- through appeal to ! ariolN auihorities ln the first case,the aLlthorityis a well- sure," irh€n anunpopular view is squelchedand modified by the group opin known sports IiSure; in the second,the authoniy is large numbersof People; ion. For example, ma), change your opini(m lvhen conJronted $ith the and in the third, the alrthority is a selectfew, aPPealingto our desirc to be threa t of ridicu le or'ou rejection from vour tiiends. Or you mav mod i fv your point exclusive("snob appeal"). Unfortunatel!',none of thes€authoritics offer legit_ of view at wo* or in your relitious organization in order to conform to rhe imate expertiseabout the product. FootballPla!'ers are not be€rexPerls; large prevailing opinion. In all of these casesyour yie$.s are bcing infllrenccd bv a numbersof people are often mjsled; exclusivegrouPs ofPeoPIe are frequently desire io "jump on ihe band\aagon"and avoid gettin8 lefi by yourself on the nistaken in thek beliefs.To evaluatenuihorities properlv, we havc kr ask: side of the ro.rd. The bandwagon mentality also exiends to media appeals based on viervs of seleciBroups such as celebritiesot priblic opinion polls. . lvhat are the }rrofessiorttlcredeniials on which the authorities'expertise ngAnl, critical fiinking is the tool that ).ou hare to disijnguish nn inlormed belief from a popul.rr but uninformed belief.Critically er,aluatethe foLlowing o Is their expertisejn the drr'ather are commentingon? bnnctw.lgonappeals: . I used to ihink that _ was my fa\.oritekind of music. lllrt mv Appealto Fear friends conl,incedme thdt only loserscnioy this music.So rvc stopped listenlng to it. Consider the reasoninSin thc followint arguments.Do you thhk that rhe argumentsarc sound?Why or why not? . Holl)'wood celebdtiesand supermodelsagree:Tnttoos in unusualplaces are very cool. That's toocl enough for mel I'mafraid I don't thinl you des€nea raise.AIterall, thereare many peo . In the latestCallup poll u(,percent of thoscpolled bclievethat economic ple who would be happy to have your iob at tlle salary you are currently recovery\\ ill happen h tbe next six months,so I must be wronB. receiving.I would be happy to intefl,iew some of thesepeople if you realy think that you are underyaid.

Appeal to Pity If \,'ou continue to disagree with mv interpretation o( The Cdtcherin the R!e, I'm afraid you won,t get a very good grade on your term paper. Consider the reasoninSin the following arguments.Ilo you think that the af8umentsare sound?Why or rlhy not? In both of thesearguments, the conclusionsbeing srggestedare supported by an appealto feat, by reasons that provide evidence for the conclusions. In i knot! that I ha\'en't (omplctcd mv t€rm paply, but I rediiy think thnt I ^ot the filst case, the threat is that if vou do not forgo vour salarv demands, your should be excused-This has be.ena very difficult semeiter tbr ma. I job may be in jeopardy- In the second case,the thrEat is that if you do not agre€ caught every kind of flu that camearound. ln addition, my brother hasa with the teacher'sinterpretation, you rvlll fail the cou$e. In neither instance drinking problcm, anctthis halibeen vely riFsettingio n]e. Also, my do8 are the real issues-Is a salaryincreas€ deserv€d? Is the student'sint€rpfeta- d ied. tion legitimate?- beinSdiscussed. People who appeatto fear to support their conclusims are interested or y in prevailin& regardless of &'hich position I admit that my client embezzledmoney from the compan).,vour hono. mitht be mor€ justi6ed. Ho$erer I woldcl like to bring severalfacts to your aitention.II€ is a fam ily m.n, 'ith a lrorlderful wifc and t o ielrific children.He is aJllmportant memberof the conlnuniiy. Ha is aciivein ihe church,conches a littlc leaglLe Appeal to Flattery baseball team, nnd has worked v€ry hard to be a go(xl person who carcs Flattery ioins the emotions of pilv and fear as a popular sourire of fallacious .1bout people. I think thnt !,ou should take these things in to consideration in reasoninS.This "apple hAndin8 down your senience. kind of polishint" is desiSnedto influencethe thir*ing ofothers by appealintto their vanity as a suhjtitute forproviding relevantevi- dence to support your point of Yierv.Of course,flatiery is often ln ench of theserl)perl td pitv arguments,thc' reasonsoffcrcd to srpport the a harmLess lubricant for social relationships, and it can also be used in conjunction conclusions may indeed be tnre. They arc not, hoirev€r, relevant to the con- with comPeffing reasoning- B\t appeolto enters the territory .lusion. Instead of provid;ng evidencethnt supports the concllrsion,the r!a- Jlatt?ry of fallacy wh€n itis the main or solesupport of your claim,such as "This sonsar€ designcdto make us feel sorry for the personinvohcd and thercfore is absolutelythe best courseI've ever taken.And I'm really hopint Ior an A to serve as nn agreewith ihe conclusionout ot sympathtr Although ihesr .ppeals arc often embiem of your excellentteaching." Think cdtically about the followinS examples: effcctile, the arfiumentsarc not sound. Thc probability o{ a conclusioncan bc estlblished onlv by reasonsthat support and are relevantto thc conclusion. . You have a great senseof humor, boss, and I'm particularlv fond of vour Ofcourse/not everv appeaiio pit)'is Iallacious.Therc n,f inst.ucesin which racial and homosexualiokes. They crack me upl And.lvhile we,re tatk, pity mayb€ dcscrvect,relevant, and clecisive.For example,if yolr aresolicjting in8, I'd like to remind you holv much I'm hoping lol the opportlrnitl, to ,r chnrltabledonatlon, c'r asking a friend lor a fa!or, nn honcstand straithtfor r\ork lvith you if I receivethe promotlon thai you're plaining to give io w.rd appeal to pit:- mar be approp atc. You area beauiiiul human behg, inside and out. Wh! don't you stay the night? 1rt5cJ"qL THrSMttric

Y(rLrare Jo snlart. T r\.ish I had a brain like )rours.Can tou givc me an) hinis about the chemistrv test y(Jutorrk todrly?I m taking it tomorror..

SpecialPleading This fallac! occ rs !'hen sorneonemakes themselves a specialexceptlon, itlr- o1!tsol1nd l stit'i\tion, to the reasonableappllcation of standards,principles, or expectatjons.For example,consider the follo$'ing cxchangel

"HeV hon, could )ou get me a beer?I'm poopedfrom work to.1at:" "lVell, l'm exhaustedIrom \'rorking all daY tool Whl clon't !ou gct it vour' self?" "I need you to get it becausel'm really thirst!'." As we sarv in Chnpter 1, "Perceiling, Beljeving,an.l Kirorving" $'e View ihe \a'orldthroligh our own lenses,and th€s€lenses ien.t to seethe world as tiltcd toward our interests.That's whlr spc,]irlplcndng is srLcha popular f.rLlacv:lvei e used io ireating our circumstancesas uniqoe and deser."intof spc.i.rl .onsid eration ('hen comparedto the circumstancesofothers. (lf course,oiher people tend to seethings from a {ert different pcrspcctive.Criiically evaluaiethe fot lo -int examples.

' I k|o$- that the deacllinefof the paper wasannounccd several *eeks ago and ihat v.ju made clear there lvoulcl bc no cxccptions,brit hn asking yolr to m.1keaJl exception becn$c I expcriencedsome verl' bad breaks. . I really don't like it h'hen ,vouchcck ont oiher mcn anclconrmeri on their physiques.I know that I do that (trvard other s.omen,but it's a "i+r,v thing."

. Yes,I rvoL d like to plav basketballwith vou guys, but I ant hr $'arn voui As a woman, I don't like geiting bumped around, so kel]p lour dis-

t I probabl),shoul.:tn'thave Lrsecl frrn.ls fron the trcrsurr lor mv own per sonal use,but after all I dr7the preside|t of the organizaiion.

Appeaito lgnoran(e Fallaciesin Action . !!h.rt talLi.ics do 1of rht* arc bein{ torr.ral Consider the reasonnlg nr flr b! Lh. tllo Ltehit.F h tfis ithre thf lollowing ,1lguments.Do \ou think th.1t thc tritiol?llortte,suisi!.h!!e\i\rfdndthosercchntque\tot.jntortro$rtjle, arguments,ire sormd?\Vh)' or r[h]'not? ]rom !our fi.spciti\ es ,]s lnrth i sf..rker rnd i li+elerl You sny tlrdt you don't bchevc' in Cocl B t can you Prove ihat He by assumingihe iruth of whai it is supposedlypro\ ing. Cfiticalll evaltnte ihe doesn'texi!'t? U not, ihen you hitve to accePtthc conclusionthat He docs fo!io$'inBexamplts: . snn)kint mdrijunna has Boi to bc illcgal. Othurw'isc,ii rvouldn't be GrecoTires arc the besi. No others have bcen Prol'edbetter. a8iilasi thc lall_. . With me, abortion is not a problem of religion. It's a Problemof the Consti_ Of course,l'm ielling tou the rruih. Otherwis€,I'd be lying. tution. I believethat until and unlesssomeone can establishthat the unborn then that child is alread,v by the child is not a livjng humal being, Protected StrawMan Constitution, which griaranteeslife, libert.v,and ihe pu$uit of haPpinessto all of us. Ihis f.rllacyis besiunclerstood b)' \,isualizingits rlame:You .lttacksom€one's pointofview b_vcrcating arl exagg€ratedsr"ir,rfir rersion of theposition,and the just (rcated. When the apprtl to E rordflc.argument form is used, the Personoffering ihen vou kno(k dou.n the straw mdn vou For example,consider conclusionis askinghis orher oPpon€ntto di$l/otc the conclusion lfthe oPPo- Lhef ollowing exch.ln8e: to be true This argu nent is unable to do so, then the conclusion is asse ed "I'm opposed to the missile defens€shield becauseI thirk it's a wastc of nent form is not valid becauseit G the job of lhe person proposing the the conclusion.SimPly becausean oPPonentcaniot nrgument to Prove 'lis "So you wirnt to und€rmine the securtv ot our nation dnd lea\'ethe coun- the offers no evidence that the conclusion is in fact iustified' prole conil"sion tr), defcnscless.Are yo serieus?" in the firsi example,for instance,the {act that someonecannot prove that Cod this t.rllac) to point ort that the m.rn (loesnot do€snot exist provides no Pe$uasivereason for believingthat He does Ihe bestway b comb.lt is straw reflectan accrlraterapresentrtion of vour position. For instance: "On thc contrar\',I'm very conr'(rned about national sefluit)..The monet_ Beggingthe Question that wol d be s!'ent on a n..rrlv selcssdefenae shicld can be uscd io com- bat tcrrorist th.eats,a much more crcdiblethreat than a missileattack. Take This fallacy is also known as circular reasotungbecause the Premisesof the tour straw man somewhereelse!" argun, e.nl assume or include the claim that the conclusion is true. For examPle: tlow $olrld vou rcspondto thc following argumcnts? "Ho 'do I know that t can trtlst t'ou?" . "lust ask AddaE she'Il teIIYou." You'resryint lhrt th(!budget for our (ni\€rsir)" has to be reducedby 15 peiceni kr meetskrte glLidelincs. that meansreclucing the sizeof the fac- "How do I know that I can trust Adrian?" ulty and stultentpopuiation br 15 pe(ent, ancl ihat's crir.n "Don't worr-v;l'll vouch for her" . 'l tsegsiry the questionis often fosnd in sclf-contained systems of belief, such as think we should lr,ork nt kftpint tho apnrtmcntcleani it's d mess." politics or religion. For example: "So y ire suggestingthnt rve discontinueorlr lives and bccomefull "My religion rvorshipsthe one tru€ God " timr maids so ihat lvc can live in a prisiine, spotless,antiseptic apart mcnt. That's no wnv to iiv€I" "How can yot be so sure?" "Becauseour Holv Book saYsso." "W'tr-r'sho!d I believe this Hol-v Book? RedHerring "Becnuseit was itritt€n bt the one irue Cod." ,\lso knorvn is "srnokescrccn" .r.d '1vild goosechase," the ,'fd/rc,'rirs falhcy ln other rvords, ihe problem with ihis sort of reasoningis that instcadof pro- is rommiited by introduring an irrcle\,rnt t()pic in order to di\'€rt attention ridinB relevant€vicience in suPPortof a conclusion,it simPly "goesin a circle" from the odglnal issLrebci g discussed.So, for example: rd d.it, oI tukune 257

I'm definitely in favorof the dcath peni)lt)'.Afternll, overpoprlation is a big stantial form of the falacy would include disregarding the views on nuclear problem in our world todav plant safeiy giwenby arl owner of one of ihe planis or ignoring the viervs of a companycomparing a product it manufactufes$-ith competint producis. Althouth this is ccrtainl,a novel approachto addressintthe problemo{ over- population, it's not reallv relevantto the is.sueofcapitalpunishment. Critically evaluatethe l:ollowingexamples: Two Wrongs Make a Right . I think all references to sex should be eliminated from films and music. This fallacy attempts to justify a moraly questionable action by arguing that it Prcmarital sex and out-of 'edlock childbirths are creaiingmoral decay is a respons€to anotherwrong action,either real or imagined,in fact,that tuo in society. wrongs ftake a fight. For our example, someone undercharted at a store might ius_ . ttfy k eping the extra money bv reasoning that "I've probably been over I reall-y don't believe that Srade inflation is a signiiicant problem in charg€dmany times in the past and ihis simply equalsthings higher education.E\.erybody u,ants io beliked, and ieachersare try out.,,Or he or she might even speculate,"I am likely to be overchargedin the ing to get studentsto like ihem. future,so I,m '1lst keeping this in anticipation of being cheated_,,This is a fallacious wav of thint, in8 becalrseeach action is independentand mustbe evaluatedonits own mer- Appeal to PersonalAttack its.Ifyou're overchargedand knowingly keepthe mone, that,sstealing_ lf the store knowingly overcharges yoq that's stealing as well. If the store inadver- Consider the re.soning in the folowing arguments. Do you think that the tently overcharg€syou, that's a mistake.Or as expressedin a cornmon ar8umentsare valid? Why or why not? sayin& "Two wrongs /or'f make a righi." Critically evaluatethe following examples: . YouI opinion on this issue is false. It's impossible to believe anything you Terrorists are justified in kilint innocmt p€ople because they and their people hd\ e been Ihe victim. of politic.tl repre\"ion dnd discnminatory policies. How can )ou hare an intelligent opinion about abortion? You're not a . Capital punishm€nt is wrong becausekilling muiderers just lvonan, so this is a decisionthat you'll neverhave to make. is as bad as the killines thev cortunitted.

Appeil lo persDnilrrlfaci hns been one of th€ most frequendy used fallacies through the ages. lts effectiveness r!.sults from ignoring th€ issucs of the argu- ment nnd focusjnglrNtead on the personalquaiities of the p€rsonmaking ihe argument. Bv trving to discredit ihe other person"this argument form tries to lffin-, THtru'trfi( .Acrtv!.r]r r.s ET discredit thc argummt - no matter n'hat reasons are off!'red. This fallacy is tdentifyingFallacies also referred to as the "dd lorrilc,r" argumcni, *-hich means "io lhe mnn" 4*tl rather than to the issue, and "poin ir.g fir ?t,cll,"because we are irying to Locate(or develop)aJr example of eachof the following kinds of false ensurc that anv u.ater drawn from otlr opponent's wel lvill be heated as appeals.For eachexample, explain whv vou thirrk that the appealjs not undrinkable. The cffort io discredit can take two fon s, as illusirated in the preceding 1. Appealto authority examples.The fallacycan be.?b(riir in the sensethat lre are dire(tll_atta(king 2, Appealto pity tlle credibihtl of our opponeni (asin the first cxamplc).The fall^cy canbe cll' dllrrst,rllit in the sensethat lvc are claiming that the person'scircumstances, 3. Appealio fear not charactcr, render his or her opinion so bhsad or uninfonned that it cannot 4. Appeal to ignorance be treatedseriousjy (as in the sccondexamPle). Other examplesof the circum- 5. Appealto personalaitack TheCritical Thinker's Guide to Reasoninq frcn y poi11tof delu, tl ! conceptof chonsitlglaeely ncntls tlat tuhe yo nrefaceduith a nwnbcrLtfilfcfildtir)cs, you drenhkt ta xtk?llow selccfionbnsed This book has provided you wiih the opportunitv to explore and develoP sohly.n hat you deciil(,tlal onJarceapplird Lty athtt infiutnccs. many of your critical thnking and reasoningabilities. As you haveseen, these and dilficuli to master.The processof becoming an abilities are complex What ls an Example accomplishedcdtical thinker and effectivereasoner is a challengingquest that of My Point of ViewT reqlires ongoing practice and reflection.This sectionwill present a cdtical Onc€ )'our point of view is clarified, it's useful to provide an ex:mple thai thinking/reasoning model that will help you pull together the imPortant illustlat€s your meaning. The ptocess of forming dnd defining concepis themes of this book into an inteSrated pe$peciive. This model is illustrated on involres the process of generalizing (identi8.ing general qualiries) and th€ paSe 261. ln order to become familiar with the model, you will be thinking process of jnterpreting (l(rcating specific examples). Respond to the issue r4.e through an important issue that confronts every hurnan beinS: Are PeoPle halc been considering bv beginnint irith the follolving statcmcnt: capableof ch@sing freely? . Afi exnfipleaf a|ie( clnicel tnadelol :d.asundble ta make)is . . . llere is a sampleresponser What ls My lnitial Point of View) Reasoningalways beSins with a point ofview. As a criticalthinker, ii is imPor- An ?vlnple af afree chaice I ndeuas decidinswhdtfiea t0naiar ih.Tlpre are tant fo! you to take thouShtful positions and express]rour views with confi. a n tttberaf cdrcerLlitclbtis I aruLdhaiie chasen to ga with, I) t I chosenLv den e. Using this statementas a starting point, respondas specilicallyas you mojotentirev on nryoirn, ]iJit]loutbei glarcedb!/athetiiilnences

. I beli1'e br don't belieoe)thot people&n chooselreelv because. . . What ls the Origin of My Point of View? Here is a sample respons€: To full!' uderstand and criticntly evaluateyour point of view. it's importa]tt to leview its histo4. llow ctid this point of !ie!t-develop? Have t'ou al.wavs I bclicat lhat peoplearc capdblcaf chaosiltgJreely heca seuhen I amfaceLl with hcld this vieh', or did ii delelop over time? T]1issort of annlysiswill help you choasingan9ng a tmber af 1ossibililies,I rcollv l1axe the feeli g that it is ttp understand hoif ),our pelceiving lensesregarding this i$sue were formed. to tneto fiake fhechobe thot I tjntt to. Respondto the issueof frec choiceb)' beginning(rith ihc following statementi . I fon ed nry bdief rcgtl/di gfiee choice. How (an t View Def ine My Point of Here is a sample response: More Clearly? After you state your initial point of view, the next steP is to define the issues I trnndl tny betief rcganlifig lrce choi:e hen Lj'./s i'I high rchtol l spd t(i more clearly and specifically. As you have seen. the language that we us€ has belia,c that e'derytling hnpp{1cdbeauqe it had to, b..cnuseit iaasdetur inei- multiple levels of meaning, and it is often not clear precisely what meaning(s) 'fhefi lul1t I uis in hiilh schoal,I got itL'al?edwith the 'lt'roltgcroud" atd people are expressing-To avoid misunderstandlngsand sharpenvour o!\'n det'elopedsolne hLld tutbils. I stapptdLloing st:haaluark n i e|)!nsfopped atte d thinking, it is essentialihatyou clarify the key conceptsas early as possible.ln l,rs ,/rxt .lirssrs.I rrdso, fheb nk olJailingehen I suddo Vch.h, ry senses this casethe central concept is "choosingfreely." Respond by begiruing with i d snid to vsalf, "This is 't iuhnt I uant fot 111!lilt." Tlnaugh sheet the following statement: iliLrrou'er,l turncLlerirtllthhxg Nnlmil. I ch.1:3et1ny t'rie ds, inryrLtxdny htlbils,m i ultinolelyErtldlE :d roilhf4ting colors.Fron that tit e a,t I k eu' . Fnm ny pointoJ .1j{u, the concept oJ " chaasrry.fieely" n\ans . . . thrt I hntl the|o1uer af jiee .haiccnt l thnl it it)nsrlp to ,E to jltikt the ri,lht Here is a sample response: 260 Chapter seven Rdinittu Crit l.rtty 'Ih. Cnrnal'ntntkd 5 Cn . to Resnn.8 261

\Mhat Are lvly llssu mptions? ORIGIN Assumptions are beliefs, often unstated, that underlie your point of vie\{ Whatare Many di$putesoccur and remain unresolvedbecause ihe people involved do myLJfslaled not recognizeor expressth€ir assurnptions.For example,in ihe very emotional be efs? debate over abofiion, when people who are opposed to abortion call their opponents"murdercrc," they are assumingthe fetus,at axy siageof develop ment from lhe lerlilized eBB onward. is a "human life," since murd€r refers to the takint of a hunlan life. When people in favor of abortion call theil oppc nents "moral fascists," they are assuming that antiabortionists are melely TOOKEEHIND Initialdescr'ption Cleardefinition LOOKBEHIND interested in imposing their narrow moral views on others. OTHERPOINT E€mples OIHERPOINI ThLLs,it's important for all parties to identify clearly the assumptionsthat OFVIEW oFvlEw form the foundation of iheir poinis ofvic$,. Thev may still end up disagrcein8, 6I Reasons brii at leasi they will know whai ihey are arguing about. Thinking about the d ! issue thai we have been exptoring, rcspr:ndby begiining $,ith the followinS 6 Arqumeft5 i I SUPPORT Relevafi? . Whefl | sa-vthr:tt I beli?I)?(or don't bclievd inJree doice, I am assrLmhry. . . 9 | Reasonr l- Herc is a sample response: d I Evidence le ,3I *eumensiS LOOKTO Whe l sa! that I belieLvin chote, I oltrtt s mit]:8that Wple arc ofle pre- LOO( IO THT -free oN€srot OTHIR rttlhtd t ith dilfemt alternati.oesto choo* [nm, nnd I an also assul ing thdt SIOE they arc ible to selectfreely an! of tfusc dlte uti.tes i dependentof any itllu-

Wllat Are the Reasons,Evidence, and CONCLUSION DECtStON /\tguments ThatSupport My Paintof View? soLuTroN Everybody has opinions. What disiinguishesinform€d opinions from unin- PREDICTIOI'T formed opinions is the quality of the reasons, e\.idence, and argoments that suppot the opinions. Respond to the issue of Irce choice by beginnint with the following statement: . Tlere are a Tnriety of rcasons,elide ce, darg nents thol support ry belirl (or Llisl]dlieflin lree choice.Fi rsf . . . Secand. . . T11i111. . . Herc is a sampleresponse: coNSEQUENCES Whatwllhappen Thercarc n L,atiety of rct$ons, tridcnce, lntl arguments thdt slrypt)tl ),1y btliel in .ftacchaicc. First,I harca i)crttstrongand cani'itlci1rypersanal itllltitiofi whcfiI sadoptedT Nn ldkitig choi.?sthnt nlt chaicesnrc free. Se':otLd,freed,:nt is Iied tt) rcspat$i- A ,ffiud ot u..l odginally d.vised by Rrtph H- r6ign bi|iry. If peoplemake Jrce rhoit.s, lhan lhey drc r5ponsiblefor the nnsequences "*.-" "na I.hnson. Jnd hyuur b! J thrL knt Tlinkd Redsoniig chapter seven i@$rtrll r' nn.?xv s Gtilc to 263

of theil chaiaes.Slnce ipe oJttn hold peal'lt:rlspansible lhat ) eins lhltt ut) lyzed reachin8 €onclusions; Chapter 5 explored the inferen€es we use to make all oI theil predictions. With respect to the sample issue we have been considering ;lin t' that dr choicesare lire. Third, if Peo r drc notftPe, and - atrd determinint whether we can make free choices the goal is lo achieve oicesare detetmined by eier,lnl farce\.Ihrn liJb uatltl ha-oelittle Purqse - a Eut ue do believethat thoughtful conclusion,This is a complexprocess of analysisand synthesisin thereiuould be na Painfin tryi1t h) ifipn)'reafisek)es which we consider ail points viewi liJl- ll,s purposenu,l ire dD try to h prort ot,:,sel'es st&gesti g lhal \ue olso of evaluate the supporting reasons, evi- dence/ and argumentsi and then construct out most informed conclusion, belie.'ethat aw thaicestlre Ifte Respond to our sample issue by using the following statem€nt as a starting point: what AreOther Points of Viewon fhislssue? t Atler e:(aminingdiferent poiftfs of uie.,t)dtld c/iliully erJaluntingthe reasans, they striv€ to view situations Onc of ihe hallmarks of critical thinkers is thai eo lenae,ahd argumantstlnt slpporl the eario s persrytfues, my conclusiotl "think emPathically" r'ithin other flom p€rsp€ctives oth€'r than their own, to aboutflee choiceis . . . r'iewpoints, particr.rLarlythose of peopLewho disagreelvith iheir own lf $'e Here is a sample lesponse: stay ;tt ttu. oh'n natrow ways of vieiving the world' the deYelop- "ntrench.d a ment of our mirds $'ill be s€verelylimitecl This is the onlv way to achieve Afer exatnininSdifercnt points of rie'o and deep ancl iull understandingof life's complexities ln workinB to uiderstand criticnlly evaluating lhe reasotls, milence, and drgtme ts that support lhe Mious perltectiees, ny other points of view, we need to identify the reasons,eviden'e, and alSuments con lusion io ihe issuewe have aboutjlee chaiceis that we are capableoJ making chaicesbut that afi that h;ve brought PeoPIeto theseconclusions ResPond Jree Jrce- .lom is som"jines limiteil. For example,nany of tclions been analyzinS by beginning with the Iollo&'ing siatement: our arc co ditione.l by our pdstexperience, and ue arc ofel1ihfluenced by atherpenple uithout being derP att this issue tight be A thitd poiflt oJlierr ott this . A secondpainl of 470a/eof il. h1otder to take free choices,ue needto becifie awarcof theseinflb issuenight be. . . enccsand thm decidcahat cowse of aclbn ue wanth) chDose. As laflgas ue are naware of thescittluences, Here is a sample resPonse: theVcan limit our abilitV to fi!1kefree, ikdependent

A seco,ltlpoitt of oiar ott thi. is. r /r.ightbe that man! of ttur choicesare con- ,lltiontrl iy etperientestlltlt'r,. halrehnd itL ittttysthnl iL)enlc nof e"renarlnre of' What Are the Consequences? you or For entnryle,vou might clnosea $reel becase af santcoe ad'flire The final step in the rcasoning process is to becauseoj tlre expectitions ol otherc,nltha gh yal1 ftay be unawarc aJ these determine the conse4lancesof our conclusion,decisio[ solution,or prediction. Iltlta cest11t yor;r .lecisiafi At yo fttighl thooseta datesanBo e becase he al The consequencesrefer towhatis nrc likely to happen iJ our conclusion is adopted. tooking ahead in this tushion is sic rcuilds you oJsomet'nefromYotr Past, allhorryhyot tu|ia'e you ',/.k- this issuetttight be that our helpful not simply for anticipatingthe future but alsofor evaiuatinSthe pres- i g a lDttlltlftee dccisian,A fhild loinl of irlu an ent. ldmtify the consequmces of your conclusion regarding free cltoitts orc'influarced by peoPlearounit s, nlthoughi,e mall rlol fu fully ffiLnre choice by p ('J o r nis' begnming with the following siatementl of it. For exanLple,r,.,c nay 8t)nlottg :t,ith n En 'l'cisit)tl fiiends' that n't ire makilrgan ifideryttiLentchoice t h*e ly thi11ki18 Theconsequcfices al belicoifig (or disbelictitlgin fee choiceare . . Here is a sample response: What ls My Conclusion,Decisian, Salution, or Prediction? The cDnsequencesaf helieviflg in ftee choicedrc taking ificrcasing percofi|l an informed and successtulcon- rcspofisibility nnd shouing peoplehow lo inoease lheb Jreettofi. Thet'irct ton The ultimate PurPost'of reasoningis to reach reasoninS sequetlcei9 that iJpeaple arc abLe ta makc ch)ices,then they ire respansible clusion,rJccisio& solution, or Prediciion.ChaPters 1 and 3 described Jtec lhe rcsultsof thei choies. Thly can't bldmeother people,bad luck, ot el'cnls apProachesfor making decisiorisand solving Probierns;Chapters 2 and -l ana- Jor ,beyokd theit contrcL' 'Ihey hnl)eto ac.eptrcsponsibility. Tlt secondca se- Cimcar TH|NK|NGaND OBED|TNCEro AurHontw qimce is that, allhough our lieedoft can belinild by itlJluencesol lohich 1Lvarc by John Sabini and Maury Silver tnaunre,ue &n incrcaseo r becoring awareofthese ifllueficesand frecd.,n1bV IJtrhis1974 book, ObediencetD Authtn it\, Sta\Iey Mitgram reporis experi_ lheftdeciLlitlg what u,e uant ta do.If peaplenrc not able ta makelree chaices,thek ments on deshrctive obedience.tn these experimentsthe subiectsare llcy arenot respansihle uhdt thE da, not nft lheUable ta incrcasetheir Iree- Jot rdccowith a drdrrdti.choicc, one app.rrcntly invo,vingc\rremr pain rnd tonl. This co ld learlpeople to adopl nn atlitlde of res4latiofl and oPathy. perhdp\ iniury to someoneetse. When rhe subiert arrires dt th; tabora_ torv, the experimenter tells him (or hcr) and another subiect _ a Dleas, rnr. , r uncular miJJle-agedBentlcman (.L .Lr,l.ly an r.tor) - that rl,e ^ Ti{ir\rKtt\t6 .r{lt trrv a.6 t@i study concernsthe effectsof punishmenton learning.Through a rigged drawing, the lucky subject wi_ns the role of teacher and the exDeri 4"'L Applying the "Guideto Reatoning" menter'sconfcderate bccomes t}le ,,leamer Identify an important issue in which you are interested, and aPPly The Criti In the next stageof the exp€riment,the teacherand learner are taken Guide to Reasoningto analyzeii cal Thinker's to an adjacentroomt the Ieamer is strappe.linto a chair and electrodes are attachedio his arm. Ii appearsimpossible . What is my initial poini of view? Ior the learner to escape. Whil€ strapped in the chair, the leamcr diffidently mentions rhat he hns . How can I define my point of vies' more clearly? a heart condition. The experimenter replies rhat $,hile the shocks may be pdintJl. they c,ru.e no pcrmanent tissuc dnmagc. thF reacher;, . What is an exampleof my of view? Foiit instructedtorcad io the learnera list of wordpairs, to testhim on the list, and to administer prmishment - an electri. shock - whenever the . What is the origin o{ my Point of view? leamer eIIs. The teacher is $!'en a sample shock of 45 volrs (rhe onty real . What are my assumptions? shocl ddminisleredin the cour\e ot lhe e\pFr;mcnt).The e\perimenler rnstructsthe teacherto increasethe level of shockone siep on the shock . What arethe reasons,evidence, and argumentsthat suPPorimy Point tenerator for each mistake, The t€nerator has thirty swiiches labeled view? of from 15 to 450 volts. Beneath these vottage readings are labels rangint from "SLIGHT SHOCK" ro "DANCER: . l{hat are other points of view on this issue? SEVFRE SHOCK,,, and finalv

. What is my conclusion,decision, soluiion, or Prediction? Th€ experimentstarts routinety. At the fifth shocklevel, hoIr.evcr,ihe confederatetrunts in annoyance,and by ihe rime the eighth shocklevel . What are ihe consequmces? is rcached, he shouts that the shocks are becoming painful. Upon reach- ,,Experimenter, in8 the tenth level (150volts), he criesout, get me out of herel I won't be in the experimentany morel I refuse to go onJ,,This re\pun.cmakcs plrLn the inlcn-it! of the p..rn ,- rt{riu{ riud Pirss.a{€ rnd unJersco.estl-e Itrl learner'sright to be released.At the 270-voltievel, theleamer,s resDons€ becomes an agoniz€d scream, and ar 300 volts the critical Thinkinqand obedien@to Authority learner refuies to -r-L ansn'erfurther.l\rhen the voltageis increasedtiom300!,olts to 330volts, Th€following reading sel€ctionby John Sabini.rnd Mauiy Silver d€monstrates the confederateshrieks in pain at eachshock and gjvesno ansrver From js graphic.rllyihe destructiveeffects of.rftill"s to think criiicallyand sutgests 330volis on, the learner heard from no more, and the teacherhas no ways to avoid thesefailures. After readinSthis Provocatives€lection, answer wat, oI knowint whether the leamer is still conscious or, tor that matter, the questionsthat follow. .tliv€ (the teacheralso knows that the e:\perimentcrcnnnot tell the con_ i''L !li!.d !niill,: Lnn( n, 'Qn'l,B

the point of adminisieringshocks of,150 \]olts. Indecd, Vlilgrim dskeda \:i r: , ' .:,i i' t il! sampleof psychiatristsaict a sampleof.rdults rvith various o(cupations to predict whether they would obev the orders of the experimenter. All of ll-epeoplL.rsl.d .lajTed thnt,te) houtddi.obe\ ..-omFprrnr A\.rre that people would be unwilling to admit that thev thems€lveswould obey such an unreasonableand unconscionableordcr, Milsram askcd .dmp Jr^iher e uf mrdrjle-tl.r--.rdr.s to frpdict h, $. far otherpeopte would go in such a procedrrre.The d\crrge predrchon\!,rs thdt p;rh,;ps oneplron in a tl-our.rd !t,,uldcontlr,,re ro theernmelen' tunts o, how to do rhur8_xe.all mcnter entrappodsubiccts in another !vn!: Subjeds.ould not gct onr of euucafion:he lea.hshrdents ho-rv,to do long division_ holt, toparse the experimenti1;ithout having k' c\plain.rnd jrstir\ rheir abandoning s€nrenccs,how to solve phl,sics probtcrns.t!'e incut(.arethese \li[s in shrdcnrs th€ir dut! to thc'c\perim€rrt ;rnd to him. ,\nd how !\.erethey to do this? nut bt. or nor onlv tv. ptv. in8 them fdo\ ur cren stratcgiesro remcmbor. Somcsubjects nttempted to justifvtheir lerving bv.Lrimjng rh.t thev Urt f,,, gir:i,,g',Jl".. c!rtdin\ort,ot .\,pe.iencf\by (urr,,ctir.d "f* could not berf to go (nr, "p(I.s|)llal rhemv\.hen thej err.an.J.uun. brt sLrrhnppc,rls nr r€asons"rverc l{n.rr" suLllt ',a! bc uiefLrttre(.. subi-($ in thc \,litg;ir e\pcrrent Lnapter )everl fir-Aitrtol lh'rlrr. Chitlt L. ko:nri\ 271

sufferednot so much from d failure to rememberthat as centerfielders the 'tther subiects."Public reinfoicementof our beliefscan libcratc us thev rhould c.k h fly bdll\ ns they drd from an in'rbility to do so pldving i:romillegitimate pressure. The reasonfor this is twofold. un;er lights at ni8ht, with a greatdeal of rvirld, and when ihefe is ambi- Agreementwith others clarifies the cognitive issue and helps us see the morally suih about h'hether time-out has been called To imProve the Players' or empiricauyri8ht answerto quesiions.Bui it alsocan have another iUitit-v t" fly balls, in game conditions, i'te recornmendPractice eflect - a nonraiional one. "hag }\le rathei than leirures, and the closerthe circumstancesof Practicetlr the lraveclaimed that pafi ofthe pressuresubjects faccd in djsobeying is likely 'was produced bv havint to conditions of the actual 8ame, the morc elfective the Practice deal with the embarrassment that miBht cmergefrom conlrontation.Social support provides a counter,pressure. Good teache$ from Scrates on have known that the intellect must be Had the subects committed themseh.es publicl_vto disobedience before euiering trainedi one kind of trainin8 is in criticizing authority We teachersare the expednent then they could have counteredpressr.res pro- we can only do duced bv disobedience(during authorities and hence can Prolide Practice Of course, rh€ experimenr) by considering the cmbarrassm€nt that if we /e,ft.ri,authorities Practiceat criticizing us if we do not tesPect of admittinS to oihers (after ihe €xperimeni) that they had obeyed. our own authority is of little u-se.We do not tlave a recipe for bein8 an Various self-help Broups like Alcoholics Anonvmous and Weight nr.lthoritywho at the same hme encouragescriticism, but we do know Watchersteach indiriduals to managesocial prerjsures to ser\.e gooo that is what is imPortant And sometimeswe can tell when we areeither ends. pressures noi encouragingcriticism crrnhen we have ceasedbeing an authodty Social are forcesin our livcs $'hether we concederhem or not. The Both are equallYdamagi.S rationalperson, the personwho wo ld keephis actionir accord with Practice with ihe Milgam situation rniSht helP too; ii might help for his values, must learn to face or ar.oid thosc Dressuresrvhen thev act lu.1(.gradehis , . students to "role play" the subj€cts'Plight' lf noihing else,donlg this a,lron. ort cqu.1l\ rnrp,,rralr'nc"ughr,, le,r.nru ,nptoy the pressure mieht brinq home in a lorcrble w'dy the embarrassmenithat suble

Thinking creativety Dev€loplngtdea5 that are ufque, userlr,and wonhy of iunher

' ,.,:'r. ,,-i;i' "'

.

'. I rhinking Critica y 1.. careiuly eramintng our th nk no .1 n orderto .larityand inprove -

creatinga Ufephitosophy