Clear and Present Thinking Project Director Brendan Myers (Cegep Heritage College)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Clear and Present Thinking Project Director Brendan Myers (cegep Heritage College) Contributors to the first edition Brendan Myers, Charlene Elsby (Purdue University Fort Wayne) Kimberly Baltzer-Jaray (University of Waterloo) Nola Semczyszyn (Franklin & Marshall College) Natalie Ellen, editor (University of Guelph) Contributors to the second edition Brendan Myers (lead author) Charlene Elsby (contributor, chapter 7) Alex Zieba (cegep Heritage College, contributor, chapter 10.1.) Editor / Proofreader Melinda Reidinger (Anglo-American University of Prague) Layout and Design Nathaniel Hébert, winterhebert.com This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ For all other enquiries, please visit brendanmyers.net Published by Northwest Passage Books Gatineau, Québec, Canada 2017. ISBN 978-0-9939527-9-1 Clear and Present Thinking A handbook in logic and rationality. Second edition, 2017 Northwest Passage Books Contents Clear and Present Thinking Table of Contents Introduction: What is thinking? 07 Chapter Three: Informal Logic— Habits of Thinking 61 Is logic difficult?08 Why is good thinking important? 11 3.1. Self-Interest 61 About the Organization Of This Book 13 3.2. Saving Face 62 3.3. Peer Pressure 63 Chapter One: An Outline 3.4. Stereotyping and Prejudice 64 History of Logic 15 3.5. Excessive Skepticism 65 3.6. Intellectual Laziness 65 1.1 We Usually Say It Began In Greece 15 3.7. Using “Deepities” 67 1.2. With Men Like Socrates of Athens (469-399 BCE) 17 3.8. Bullshitting 67 1.3. But It Also Began In China… 18 3.9. Relativism 68 1.4. …And in India, As Well 20 3.10. The Consequences of Bad Habits 70 1.5. Plato Of Athens (c. 424-348 BCE) 21 3.11. Curiosity 70 1.6. Aristotle of Stagira (384-322 BCE) 22 3.12. Self-Awareness, and Socratic Wisdom 71 1.7. The Great Library of Alexandria (c. 295 BCE) 23 3.13. Physical Health 71 1.8. The Arabs and the Persians 25 3.14. Courage 72 1.9. Then Suddenly, It Was the Middle Ages… 26 3.15. Healthy Skepticism 73 1.10. ...Followed by Early Modernity, and 3.16. Autonomy 74 the Enlightenment 28 3.17. Simplicity 74 1.11. David Hume (1711-1776) 31 3.18. Patience 75 1.12. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) 32 3.19. Consistency 75 1.13. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) 33 3.20. Open-ness and open-mindedness 75 1.14. They Made Words Like Numbers, and 3.21. Asking for help 76 Built Thinking Machines 34 3.22. Summary remarks 77 1.15. The Early Twentieth Century 37 1.16. The Quest for a Logically Perfect Language 37 Chapter Four: Basics of Formal Logic 79 1.17. Western Philosophy Today: A House Divided 39 1.18. Summary comment 40 4.1. A few words about words 79 4.2. Definitions80 Chapter Two: Informal Logic—Questions, 4.3. Sense and Reference 81 Problems, and Worldviews 43 4.4. Implicature 82 4.5. Propositions 82 2.1. Intellectual Environments 43 4.6. Truth 84 2.2. World Views 46 4.7. Categorical Propositions 85 2.3. Framing Languages 48 4.8. More Kinds of Propositions 88 2.4. Problems and Limit Situations 51 4.9 Parts of Arguments 90 2.5. Observation and Objectivity 52 2.6. Questions 54 Chapter Five: Arguments 95 2.7. Differing World Views57 2.8. Value Programs 58 5.1. Deductions 95 5.2. Categorical Syllogisms 95 5.3. Enthymemes 97 Contents Clear and Present Thinking 5.4 Using Venn Diagrams to find the validity of 7.19. Naturalistic Fallacy 139 a categorical syllogism 98 7.20. Complex Question Fallacy 139 5.5. Modus Ponens or Affirming the Antecedent100 7.21 Equivocation 139 5.6. Affirming the Consequent: Modus Ponens’ 7.22. Begging the Question 140 Invalid Half-Brother 101 7.23. False Dilemma 140 5.7. Modus Tollens or Denying the Consequent 102 7.24. Hasty Generalization 140 5.8. Denying the Antecedent: Fallacy! 102 7.25. Faulty Analogy 140 5.9. Hypothetical Syllogism 103 7.26. Tu Quoque 141 5.10. Disjunctive Syllogism 104 7.27. Slippery Slope 141 5.11. Adjunction 105 7.28. The Fallacy Fallacy 141 5.12. Dilemmas 106 5.13. Constructive Dilemma 106 Chapter Eight: Reasonable Doubt 143 5.14. Destructive Dilemma 107 5.15. Induction 107 8.1 What is reasonable doubt? 143 5.16. Inductive Generalization 108 8.2. Doubting your own eyes and ears 145 5.17. Statistical Syllogism 109 8.3. Doubting your Common Sense 146 5.18. Induction by Shared Properties 110 8.4. Doubting your Emotions, Instincts, and Intuitions 148 5.19. Induction by Shared Relations 112 8.5. Confirmation Bias149 5.20. Exercises for Inductions 112 8.6. Lack of evidence 151 8.7. Contradictory Claims 152 Chapter Six: Science and 8.8. Conspiracy theories 152 Scientific Reasoning115 8.9. Doubting experts and professionals 154 8.10. Scams, Frauds, and Confidence Tricks156 6.1. Scientific Method115 8.11. Information and Media Literacy 159 6.2. What Counts as a Scientific Claim?116 8.12. The Business Model of Media 159 6.3. A Formal Definition of ‘Science’119 8.13. Analysing the Form and Content 164 6.4. Scientific Evidence and its Roots in Empiricism120 8.14. Propaganda and Disinformation 165 6.5. Underdetermination and Overdetermination 122 8.15. Fake News 170 6.6. Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions124 8.16. Advertising and Marketing 172 6.7. Science and Its Values 125 Chapter Nine: Moral Reasoning 175 Chapter Seven: Fallacies 131 9.1. Features of Moral Arguments. 175 7.1. Appeal to Authority 131 9.2. A Taxonomy of Moral Theories. 176 7.2. Appeal to Force 132 9.3. Utilitarianism 177 7.3. Appeal to Emotion 132 9.4. Deontology 179 7.4. Appeal to Tradition 133 9.5. Areteology / Virtue Theory 181 7.5. Appeal to Novelty 133 9.6. Social Justice 183 7.6. Appeal to Ignorance 133 9.7. Ethics of Care 185 7.7. Shifting the Burden of Proof 133 9.8. Discourse Ethics 186 7.8. Appeal to Popularity 134 7.9. Fallacy of Accident 134 Chapter 10: Activities! 189 7.10. Amphiboly 135 7.11. Fallacy of Composition 136 10.1. Finding Your Online Diversity Quotient 189 7.12. Fallacy of Division 136 10.2. The Socratic Dialogue Game 192 7.13. Straw Man Fallacy 136 10.3. Nomic: The Game of Self-Amendment 193 7.14. Red Herring 136 10.4. Thought Experiments 194 7.15. Abusing The Man 137 7.16. False Cause 138 Epilogue: Why can’t we all just get along? 196 7.17. Non Sequitur Fallacy 139 7.18. Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle 139 Glossary of Terms in Logic and Philosophy 198 Acknowledgments This second edition was financially supported by the contributions of over 170 people, through the Kickstarter.com fundraising website, including: Joshua Smith Truls Bjørvik Richard Shea Chris Wityshyn Robert Tharp Rafael Dellamora Ellen Seebacher Tristan Knight Bernd Buldt Shirelle Capstick Deanna Smith Karen MacLeod Mike Little Ben Rossi Debbie Goldsmith Glenn McCrimmon Joe Roy JD Ferries-Rowe trit Cynthia Savage Eric Hortop Christopher White Anthony Coppola Nayel hakim Jussi Myllyluoma Ellen Behrens Steffen Nyeland Kay M Purcell John Beckett Tom Devin Kibler Bart Salisbury Graham Engel Steven Hosford Holly Bird Introduction Is logic difficult? Introduction: What is thinking? It may seem strange to begin a logic textbook with you in fundamentally different ways. Some people this question. ‘Thinking’ is perhaps the most intimate believe that computers, or animals, are capable of and personal thing that people do. Yet the more you thinking, even if their way of thinking is somehow dif- ‘think’ about thinking, the more mysterious it can ferent from that of humans. Some people believe there appear. Do our thoughts appear in our minds because are things that the thinking mind cannot discover on of the electro-chemical workings of our brains? Or do its own, and that there are other forms of knowing: thoughts come from something that can’t be described intuition, or religious faith, or some sort of inspira- by science, such as a soul? Are there deeper levels to the tion. And some might say that the question ‘what is scientific explanation of thinking, for instance involv- thinking?’ cannot be answered at all. We could also ask ing sub-atomic quantum effects? Or do our thoughts personal questions about the nature of thinking, such come from pure magic? Does it fit the case to say that as: ‘who is it that knows that he or she knows?’ Who is it our thoughts ‘come from’ some place? Or that they that is aware of thinking? And is not that awareness of ‘appear’ in our minds? Are the workings of the mind thinking itself a kind of thinking? very different from the workings of the heart? Or are It’s a little bit beyond the purpose of this book emotions and feelings only another kind of thinking? to investigate those questions. But if you happen to Might the same be said of intuitions, or inspirations, or find yourself curious about some of those questions, dreams? or wondering how do you know that you know Let’s say, as a starting place, that thinking is an something, or if you find yourself thinking about the activity of the mind. We can direct this activity towards nature of thinking itself, you may be well on your way all kinds of different purposes, from everyday ques- toward becoming a philosopher! We, the authors and tions like how to spend your money or what to have contributors of this book across two editions, would for dinner tonight, to the highest and deepest matters like to show you how it is possible to reason about like the meaning of life.