DOCSLIB.ORG

A Miniguide to Critical Thinking

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Miniguide to Critical Thinking A MINIGUIDE TO CRITICAL THINKING Joe Y. F. Lau University of Hong Kong A Miniguide to Critical Thinking This text is disseminated via the Open Education Resource (OER) LibreTexts Project (https://LibreTexts.org) and like the hundreds of other texts available within this powerful platform, it freely available for reading, printing and "consuming." Most, but not all, pages in the library have licenses that may allow individuals to make changes, save, and print this book. Carefully consult the applicable license(s) before pursuing such effects. Instructors can adopt existing LibreTexts texts or Remix them to quickly build course-specific resources to meet the needs of their students. Unlike traditional textbooks, LibreTexts’ web based origins allow powerful integration of advanced features and new technologies to support learning. The LibreTexts mission is to unite students, faculty and scholars in a cooperative effort to develop an easy-to-use online platform for the construction, customization, and dissemination of OER content to reduce the burdens of unreasonable textbook costs to our students and society. The LibreTexts project is a multi-institutional collaborative venture to develop the next generation of open-access texts to improve postsecondary education at all levels of higher learning by developing an Open Access Resource environment. The project currently consists of 13 independently operating and interconnected libraries that are constantly being optimized by students, faculty, and outside experts to supplant conventional paper-based books. These free textbook alternatives are organized within a central environment that is both vertically (from advance to basic level) and horizontally (across different fields) integrated. The LibreTexts libraries are Powered by MindTouch® and are supported by the Department of Education Open Textbook Pilot Project, the UC Davis Office of the Provost, the UC Davis Library, the California State University Affordable Learning Solutions Program, and Merlot. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1246120, 1525057, and 1413739. Unless otherwise noted, LibreTexts content is licensed by CC BY-NC-SA 3.0. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation nor the US Department of Education. Have questions or comments? For information about adoptions or adaptions contact [email protected]. More information on our activities can be found via Facebook (https://facebook.com/Libretexts), Twitter (https://twitter.com/libretexts), or our blog (http://Blog.Libretexts.org). This text was compiled on 09/28/2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS This miniguide introduces some of the basic concepts and principles of critical thinking. 1: CHAPTERS 1.1: INTRODUCTION 1.2: MEANING 1.3: DEFINITIONS 1.4: NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS 1.5: LINGUISTIC PITFALLS 1.6: BASIC LOGICAL CONCEPTS 1.7: VALIDITY AND SOUNDNESS 1.8: PATTERNS OF VALID ARGUMENTS 1.9: CAUSATION 1.10: MORALITY 1.11: FALLACIES AND BIASES 1.12: GOING FORWARD BACK MATTER INDEX GLOSSARY 1 9/28/2021 CHAPTER OVERVIEW 1: CHAPTERS 1.1: INTRODUCTION 1.2: MEANING 1.3: DEFINITIONS 1.4: NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS 1.5: LINGUISTIC PITFALLS 1.6: BASIC LOGICAL CONCEPTS 1.7: VALIDITY AND SOUNDNESS 1.8: PATTERNS OF VALID ARGUMENTS 1.9: CAUSATION 1.10: MORALITY 1.11: FALLACIES AND BIASES 1.12: GOING FORWARD 1 9/28/2021 1.1: Introduction Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally about what to believe or do. This requires careful, reflective and independent thinking. Critical thinking does not mean being argumentative or always being critical of others.Although critical thinking skills can be used to expose fallacies and bad reasoning, they can also be used to support other viewpoints, and to acquire new knowledge. Good critical thinking helps us solve problems, and is useful for all kinds of careers.Thinking clearly and logically also helps us express our ideas more effectively, and improves our presentation and language skills. Some people think that critical thinking is incompatible with creativity. This is a misconception, as creativity is not just a matter of coming up with new ideas. The new ideas should also be useful. We need critical thinking to evaluate whether an idea is useful, and find ways to make them even better. Critical thinking is necessary for self-reflection. To live a meaningful life, we need to think about ourselves and our values objectively and critically. This mini guide introduces some of the basic concepts and principles of critical thinking. But it is not meant to be a comprehensive survey. For further study, readers can consult my textbook An Introduction to Critical Thinking and Creativity – Think more, Think Better, published by Wiley in 2011. There is also a list of recommended books and online resources at the end of this guide. Joe Y.F. Lau Department of Philosophy The University of Hong Kong Email: [email protected] Website:http://philosophy.hku.hk/joelau Jan 2020 Copyright: This work is free to use for non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Joe Y.F. Lau 1.1.1 9/7/2021 https://human.libretexts.org/@go/page/92505 1.2: Meaning Literal meaning is a property of linguistic expressions. The literal meaning of a sentence is determined by its syntax and the conventional meaning of the words in the sentence. The literal meaning of a sentence should be distinguished from its conversational implicature the information that is implicitly conveyed in a particular conversational context, distinct from the literal meaning. For example, suppose we ask Amie whether she wants to go hiking and she replies, “I am verytired”. Naturally we would infer that Amie does not want to go hiking. But this is not part of the literal meaning of her reply. Rather, the information that she does not want to go is inferred indirectly. Similarly, suppose Lala says, “Po likes books”. We might take Lala to be saying that Po likes to read. But this is at most the conversational implicature, and not part of the literal meaning of what Lala said. It might turn out that Po hates reading and she likes books only because she uses them to decorate her house. But even if this is the case, Lalas assertion is stilltrue. These examples show that when we want to find out whether a statement is true, we should consider its literal meaning, and not the conversational implicature. This is particularly important in the legal context. The content of a contract is typically determined by the literal meaning of the terms of the contract. If there is a dispute about the contract, ultimately it is settled by looking at the literal meaning of the terms, and not by what one or the other party thinks was implied implicitly. Meaningless vs. empty statements In ordinary usage, the adjective meaningless is sometimes used rather indiscriminately. Very often, claims that are pointless or empty are also described as meaningless. For example, suppose Peter is asked whether he will go to the party, and he replies “if I come, I will come”. Strictly speaking, this is an empty statement as it does not provide any useful information. But the statement is perfectly grammatical and meaningful. To be accurate one should not describe such statements as meaningless. Joe Y.F. Lau 1.2.1 9/7/2021 https://human.libretexts.org/@go/page/92506 1.3: Definitions Lack of clarity in meaning can hinder good reasoning and obstruct communication. One way to make meaning clearer is to use definitions. A definition is made up of two parts: the definiendum and the definiens. The definiendum is the term that is to be defined, whereas the definiens is the group of words or concepts used in the definition that is supposed to have the same meaning as the definiendum. For example, bachelor is defined as an unmarried man. The word “bachelor” is the definiendum, and “an unmarried man” is the definiens. We now look at four main kinds of definitions. Reportive definition A reportive definition is also known as a lexical definition. It reports the existing meaning of a term. This includes the bachelor example above, or the definition of prime number as any integer greater than one and divisible only by one and itself. A reportive definition should capture the correct usage of the term that is defined. Stipulative definition A stipulative definition is not used to explain the existing meaning of a term. It assigns a new meaning to a term, whether or not the term has already got a meaning. If the stipulative definition is accepted, then the term is used in the new way that is prescribed. For example, we might stipulate “KFC” to mean “Korean-style Fried Chicken”. Once the definition is accepted,we can then say things like, “We are going to cook KFC for dinner tonight”. Precising definition A precising definition is used to make the meaning of a term more precise for some specific purpose. For example, a bus company might want to give discounts to elderly passengers. But simply declaring that the elderly can pay a reduced fare will lead to many disputes, since it isnot clear how old one should be to qualify as an elderly person. So one might define “an elderlyperson” to mean any person of age 65 or above. This is of course one among many possible definitions. A precising definition might be seen as a combination of reportive and stipulative definition. Precising definitions are very important in drawing up laws and regulations. We might want to eliminate or punish sexual harassment, but we need a good definition of sexual harassment to clarify what is appropriate and what is not.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Language and Definitions
    This asset is intentionally omitted from this text. It may be accessed at Language and Definitions www.mcescher.com. (Waterfall by 1 Language Functions M.C. Escher) 2 Emotive Language, Neutral Language, and Disputes 3 Disputes and Ambiguity 4 Definitions and Their Uses 5 The Structure of Definitions: Extension and Intension 6 Definition by Genus and Difference 1 Language Functions When people reason, they typically do so using language, manipulating proposi- tions in a logical or informative spirit. But language is used in a great variety of ways, only some of which are informative. Without the intention to inform, we may express ourselves using language: “That’s really great!” we may say; and the poet, overcome by the beauty of an ancient city, channels his emotions in writing these lines: Match me such marvel, save in Eastern clime— A rose-red city—“half as old as time.”1 Of course, some expressive discourse also has informative content, and may express attitudes as well as beliefs. Grow old along with me! The best is yet to be, The last of life for which the first was made.2 Moreover, some discourse is directive, with or without expressive or informa- tive elements. It seeks to guide or to command. “Step on the scale, please,” we may be told, or we may receive this good advice: Drive defensively. The cemetery is full of law-abiding citizens who had the right of way. A mixture of functions is a natural feature of almost all our uses of language. We can see this in our own speech and writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    16 Definition Robert H. Ennis 1. Introduction1 Definition, though often neglected, plays an important role in critical thinking by helping us make our positions, inquiries, and reasoning clear. Every definition has three dimensions: form, action, and content. The form of a definition is essentially the structure of the definition. An example of form is definition by synonym, a simple form of definition in which the word being defined is equal in meaning to one other word. Three definitional actions that can be performed with any form of defini- tion are reporting a meaning, stipulating a meaning, and advocating a mean- ing that incorporates a position on an issue. This chapter focuses on these first two dimensions, form and action. The third dimension, content, deals with the meaning conveyed by the def- inition. The content dimension is enormous because it involves the defini- tional content of all subject matter areas, as well as all other areas of human life. Attention to the content dimension will here be exemplified only in a dis- cussion of a case of probable equivocation with the term ‘reliability’. To the extent possible, a definition should be clear, brief, efficient, informa- tive, responsive to background information, and easy to remember and under- stand. It should be at an appropriate level of sophistication and difficulty for the situation. It should employ an appropriate form and have a reasonable amount of vagueness and specificity. Because so much depends on the situa- tion, and because these general criteria overlap to some extent, informed cau- tious judgment is required. 1 I deeply appreciate the help and advice of Jennie Berg, David Hitchcock, and Kevin Possin in the development of this chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Language and Definitions 3
    M03_COPI1396_13_SE_C03.QXD 10/12/07 11:54 AM Page 71 Language and Definitions 3 3.1 Language Functions 3.2 Emotive Language, Neutral Language, and Disputes 3.3 Disputes and Ambiguity 3.4 Definitions and Their Uses 3.5 The Structure of Definitions: Extension and Intension 3.6 Definition by Genus and Difference 3.1 Language Functions We reason using language, manipulating propositions in a logical or informative spirit. But language is used in a great variety of ways, only some of which are informative. Without the intention to inform, we may express ourselves using language: “That’s really great!” we may say; and the poet, overcome by the beauty of an ancient city, channels his emotions in writing these lines: Match me such marvel, save in Eastern clime— A rose-red city—“half as old as time.1 Of course, some expressive discourse also has informative content, and may express attitudes as well as beliefs. Grow old along with me! The best is yet to be, The last of life for which the first was made2 Moreover, some discourse is directive, with or without expressive or in- formative elements. It seeks to guide or to command. “Step on the scale, please,” we may be told. Or we may receive this good advice: “Drive defensively. The cemetery is full of law-abiding citizens who had the right of way.” A mixture of functions is a natural feature of almost all our uses of lan- guage. We can see this in our own speech and writing. Emotive language may be used to advance our purposes in directing others: “That conduct is utterly 71 M03_COPI1396_13_SE_C03.QXD 10/12/07 11:54 AM Page 72 72 CHAPTER 3 Language and Definitions disgusting!” says parent to child, expressing an attitude, seeking to direct be- havior, and (with those same words) probably reporting a fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Thinking
    Critical Thinking Mark Storey Bellevue College Copyright (c) 2013 Mark Storey Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is found at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.txt. 1 Contents Part 1 Chapter 1: Thinking Critically about the Logic of Arguments .. 3 Chapter 2: Deduction and Induction ………… ………………. 10 Chapter 3: Evaluating Deductive Arguments ……………...…. 16 Chapter 4: Evaluating Inductive Arguments …………..……… 24 Chapter 5: Deductive Soundness and Inductive Cogency ….…. 29 Chapter 6: The Counterexample Method ……………………... 33 Part 2 Chapter 7: Fallacies ………………….………….……………. 43 Chapter 8: Arguments from Analogy ………………………… 75 Part 3 Chapter 9: Categorical Patterns….…….………….…………… 86 Chapter 10: Propositional Patterns……..….…………...……… 116 Part 4 Chapter 11: Causal Arguments....……..………….………....…. 143 Chapter 12: Hypotheses.….………………………………….… 159 Chapter 13: Definitions and Analyses...…………………...…... 179 Chapter 14: Probability………………………………….………199 2 Chapter 1: Thinking Critically about the Logic of Arguments Logic and critical thinking together make up the systematic study of reasoning, and reasoning is what we do when we draw a conclusion on the basis of other claims. In other words, reasoning is used when you infer one claim on the basis of another. For example, if you see a great deal of snow falling from the sky outside your bedroom window one morning, you can reasonably conclude that it’s probably cold outside. Or, if you see a man smiling broadly, you can reasonably conclude that he is at least somewhat happy.
    [Show full text]
  • (#5) a Tripartite Theory of 'Definition'
    A Tripartite Theory of 'Definition' Abstract: This essay analyzes the nature of 'definition' as a definiendum-to-definiens relationship. A 'tripartite theory' of definition is hypothesized. It states that whenever a person defines a definiendum-to-a-definiens, that person can only be interpreted as asserting either a 'reportive definition,' a 'theoretic definition,' or a 'stipulative definition.' In order to verify the truth of the theory, a conceptual investigation about the functional use of definitions in various situations is described by examples. Of special interest are the examples of 'stipulative definition.' As a mathematical anti-realist, I contend that formal systems are largely composed of stipulative definitions that are 'precisely formalized' and 'abbreviatory' in nature. To back up the tripartite theory, I comment about the entries under ‘definition’ in The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (1999). Introduction With a tripartite theory of definition, I hypothesize that whenever a person asserts how a linguistic entity (i.e. word, phrase, symbol, definiendum) has been used, is used, or is going to be used; that person can only be interpreted as asserting a reportive (i.e. lexical) definition, theoretic definition, or a stipulative definition. If this hypothesis is true, we should be able to understand any definition of a definiendum-to-definiens form (in a context) as being one of these three types. If this hypothesis is false, we should be able to find an instance of a linguistic token-to-meaning form that cannot be interpreted as reportive, theoretic, or stipulative. The tripartite theory is not an a priori truth; it is a social scientific conceptual truth that could be disconfirmed with counter examples.
    [Show full text]
  • GST203 Final 1__Docx
    Course Information Course Code: GST 203 Course Title: Introduction to Philosophy and Logic Credit Unit: 2 Course Status: Compulsory Semester: 2nd Required Study Hour: 4 hours per week Year of Course Review 2018 Course Team Course Reviewer: Dr, Oyekunle O. Adegboyega Instructional Designer: Inegbedion, Juliet O. (Ph.D.) Learning Technologists: Dr. Adewale Adesina, Nura Maidoki,& Henry Ude Content Editor: Prof. Uduma Oji Uduma Copy Editors: Inegbedion, Juliet O. (Ph.D.) & Christiana Uzoukwu (Mrs) Ice Breaker Upload your passport and introduce yourself by stating your names, what you do for a living, your hobby, your expectation in this course and the name you would prefer to be called during this course. NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA 1 © 2018 by NOUN Press National Open University of Nigeria Headquarters University Village Plot 91, Cadastral Zone Nnamdi Azikiwe Expressway Jabi, Abuja Lagos Office 14/16 Ahmadu Bello Way Victoria Island, Lagos e-mail: [email protected] URL: www.nou.edu.ng All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. Published by: National Open University of Nigeria Printed by NOUN Press [email protected] Printed 2018 ISBN: 978-978-8521-92-1 2 Course Guide Introduction Welcome to GST 203: A Study Guide for the Distance Learner. GST 203 is a two-credit unit course that has minimum duration of one semester. It is a compulsory course for undergraduate students in Science Programmes including Science Education in the university. The course guides you on the techniques of studying to achieve academic success through open and distance learning.
    [Show full text]
  • Definitions: How to Say What You Mean by Laurie Endicott Thomas, MA, ELS
    Definitions: How to Say What You Mean By Laurie Endicott Thomas, MA, ELS ou can use words to convey meaning only if your consider giving them the dictionary definition of that word, to audience understands what you intend those words save them the trouble of looking the word up. If the diction- Yto mean. You can baffle your readers by using words ary definition of a word differs from how that word is com- that mean nothing to them. You can also mislead them by monly used, you may need to give the reportive definition and using words that seem to mean something other than what explain how it differs from the lexical definition. For example, you meant to say. One way to avoid those problems is to use a word may mean something different to medical doctors common words whose meaning would be obvious to anyone. than it means to members of the general public. For example, you would write “itching” instead of “pruritus” When you are editing someone else’s work, look to see in a piece for a lay audience. whether the lexical definitions that the author gave match the Of course, we medical communicators must often dis- dictionary definitions. If they don’t match, query the author. cuss concepts that are unfamiliar to most people. Thus, we Sometimes there are good reasons for a mismatch, such as in must often use words that are new to some members of our cases of stipulative definition. intended audience. Sometimes we must even use familiar • Stipulative definition—a definition that gives a term a words that take on an unusual meaning in a particular con- specific meaning in the context of a particular discussion text.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3-Disputes and Definitions
    Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University Chapter 3-Disputes and Definitions 3.1 Introduction At this point, we must deal with one more consequence that the recognition of the pragmatic dimension of language has for the study of logic. When human beings construct arguments, they do so to establish that some conclusion follows from a set of premises. What is the context in which such an argument would normally be constructed? Often, arguments are constructed because there is dispute about the truth of some particular sentence. No sentence is worthy of belief unless we take it to be true. That is, to believe that P (some sentence) is just to believe that P is true. Remember that establishing that some sentence follows from a set of premises does not establish that the sentence is true, unless of course, all of the premises are true. That is, the way to settle disputes about whether a particular sentence is true or not is to establish that sentence as the conclusion of a sound argument. And as we have mentioned, constructing a sound argument is not always easy to do. We can, however, always make a first step in the resolution of disputes about the truth or falsity of a sentence by showing that a particular conclusion validly follows from a set of premises that are more or less uncontroversial. While we might well settle a disagreement about the truth of a particular sentence by constructing an argument with this sentence as its conclusion, not all disputes hinge on whether some particular sentence is true or false.
    [Show full text]
  • Definitions and the Growth of Knowledge: the Main Ideas*
    Summarium 45 (65) – 2016 ROBERT KUBLIKOWSKI* DEFINITIONS AND THE GROWTH OF KNOWLEDGE: THE MAIN IDEAS* Are definitions useful in an empirical knowledge-gaining process? What roles do definitions play in the process of the growth of empirical knowl- edge? Two attitudes towards definitions can be distinguished in the history of the theory of definitions. According to the first and positive one, definitions have been useful in science. The second attitude has been a critical one. I try to defend the view about the usefulness of definitions, on the one hand, by application of Hilary Putnam’s theory of reference of natural kind terms. On the other hand, Karl Popper’s fallibilism is implemented to the theory of definitions, especially to the theory of real definitions. The structure of this text is as follows: (I) the origin and the development of the theory of definitions, (II) Popperian antidefinitionism, (III) the theory of definitions and the Putnamian theory of meaning and (IV) the theory of stipulative, lexical and persuasive definitions. I. THE ORIGIN AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEORY OF DEFINITIONS The known reflection on definitions began with Aristotle.1 He distin- guished two types of definitions — of a thing and of a name. The definition of a thing was acknowledged as the most important one. It was called the real definition by genus and differentia (the genus-differentia definition). Its ROBERT KUBLIKOWSKI, PhD — Assistant Professor, The Department of Methodology of Science, Faculty of Philosophy, The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin; associate mem- ber of the Faculty of Philosophy of TN KUL; address: Al.
    [Show full text]
  • Senja Pollak Polavtomatsko Modeliranje Področnega Znanja Iz
    Univerza v Ljubljani/University of Ljubjana Filozofska fakulteta/Faculty of Arts Oddelek za prevajalstvo/Department of Translation Senja Pollak Polavtomatsko modeliranje področnega znanja iz večjezičnih korpusov Semi-automatic Domain Modeling from Multilingual Corpora Doktorska disertacija/Doctoral dissertation Mentorica/Supervisor: Študijski program: Prevodoslovje Izr. prof. dr. Špela Vintar Study program: Translation Studies University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Ljubljana, Slovenia Somentorica/Co-supervisor: Prof.ssa. Paola Velardi, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy Ljubljana, 2014 Table of contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... v Povzetek ......................................................................................................................................... vii Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ix 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Domain modeling .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Research goals ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Contributions to science .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Definitions, Uses and Varieties Of
    Definitions, Uses and Varieties of 1. Uses Definition is the activity of explaining to an audience the meaning of an expression. A definition is a product of that activity: a sentence the understanding of parts of which (the definiens ) can underwrite an audience’s understanding of the rest (the definiendum ). For example, understanding ‘is the activity of explaining the meaning of an expression’ ( definiens ) might enable one to understand a meaning of ‘definition’ ( definiendum ). Notice that definition needn’t proceed via definitions . Plausibly, the first few explanations of meaning a child is offered don’t go via sentences. Beside the immediate purpose of underwriting explanations of meaning, a definition can serve countless others. One may stipulate that an expression is to enjoy a meaning—deploying a stipulative definition . E.g., for purposes of this entry, let x be a definition iff x is a sentence used to explain meaning. (Here and throughout, initial universal quantification is suppressed and use/mention distinctions ignored.) Less immediate purposes of stipulation include abbreviation—hence, abbreviative definition —itself at the service of tractability and comprehensibility. Another purpose is marking out the definiens as of special interest, perhaps as carving at an important joint. (Whitehead and Russell, 1910.) An alternative purpose is to describe the meaning an expression carries with respect to some language or population—a descriptive or lexical definition . Thus: in English, x is a definition iff x is a sentence used to explain meaning. Less immediate purposes here include illuminating a less well understood definiendum by appeal to a 1 better understood definiens , revealing the basis of one’s understanding of the definiendum , or establishing dependence of the definiendum on the definiens .
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTORY LOGIC – Glossary of Key Terms This Glossary Includes Terms That Are Defined in the Text, in the Lesson and on the Page Noted
    INTRODUCTORY LOGIC – Glossary of key terms This glossary includes terms that are defined in the text, in the lesson and on the page noted. A statement Lesson 13, page 91 A categorical statement of the form All S is P, also called a universal affirmative. Accent Lesson 34, page 265 Changing the meaning of a sentence through improper emphasis. A fallacy of ambiguity. Ad baculum Lesson 33, page 258 Latin for “to the stick”; an illegitimate appeal to force, usually a thinly-veiled threat. A fallacy of distraction. Ad hominem Lesson 33, page 259 Latin for “to the man”; a verbal attack on the character of one’s opponent. A fallacy of distraction. Ad ignorantiam Lesson 33, page 260 Latin for “to ignorance”; an argument from lack of evidence. A fallacy of distraction. Ad populum Lesson 33, page 258 Latin for “to the people”; an illegitimate appeal to a majority. A fallacy of distraction. Affirming the consequent Lesson 31, page 229 An invalid mixed hypothetical syllogism of the form If p then q, q, therefore p. Ambiguous Lesson 1, page 10 Having more than one possible meaning. Amphiboly Lesson 34, page 266 A vagueness of grammar that disguises or alters the meaning. A fallacy of ambiguity. Antecedent Lesson 31, page 228 In a hypothetical statement if p then q, the antecedent is the statement represented by the p. Apparent disagreement Lesson 10, page 77 A difference of opinion or perception. Apriorism Lesson 35, page 273 A hasty generalization. A fallacy of form. Argument Lesson 19, page 141 A set of statements, one of which appears to be implied or supported by the others.
    [Show full text]