DOCSLIB.ORG

Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language 1St Edition Kindle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

FALLACIES AND PITFALLS OF LANGUAGE 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK S Morris Engel | 9780486157436 | | | | | Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language 1st edition PDF Book Like pattern detection, this is a useful and important human skill, but people tend to overdo it. A quantification fallacy is an error in logic where the quantifiers of the premises are in contradiction to the quantifier of the conclusion. Preview — Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language by S. Cambridge University Press. Informal fallacies — arguments that are logically unsound for lack of well-grounded premises. Sometimes one small twist of circumstance can change the course of our lives. Journal of the History of Ideas. Elementary Turkish Lewis Thomas. Home Contact us Help Free delivery worldwide. We are treated to more and more euphemisms slums are called "substandard housing"; dogcatchers, "animal welfare officers". Clark, Jef; Clark, Theo While there are doubtlessly measurement problems involved in counting the poor, Best's discussion centers on a definition problem, and thus belongs under the previous heading. Lists portal Philosophy portal. Maybe so, but what about craps players? The following fallacies involve inferences whose correctness is not guaranteed by the behavior of those logical connectives, and hence, which are not logically guaranteed to yield true conclusions. We can notify you when this item is back in stock. The following is a sample of books for further reading, selected for a combination of content, ease of access via the internet, and to provide an indication of published sources that interested readers may review. Heads I win, tails you lose. If you're not a statistician, then this book's for you. In this case, given her failure to provide such evidence it's reasonable to conclude that she lacks any. Ad hominem Ad hominem tu quoque Appeal to accomplishment Appeal to authority Appeal to etymology Appeal to motive Appeal to nature Appeal to novelty Appeal to poverty Appeals to psychology Argumentum ad lapidem Appeal to the stone Appeal to tradition Appeal to wealth Association Bulverism Chronological snobbery Ipse dixit Poisoning the well Pro hominem Reductio ad Hitlerum. In fact, I think that this little book's purported purpose is offered with tongue in cheek. If you write an honestly negative recommendation, you risk a lawsuit. Esperanza Sandoval marked it as to-read Jul 01, A red herring fallacy is an error in logic where a proposition is, or is intended to be, misleading in order to make irrelevant or false inferences. In Audi, Robert ed. These same mindsets apply more generally to argumentation. Archived from the original on 13 June Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies. Types of quantification fallacies:. No trivia or quizzes yet. George Durand Wilder. In the general case any logical inference based on fake arguments, intended to replace the lack of real arguments or to replace implicitly the subject of the discussion. Accident Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise Converse accident A dicto simpliciter Exclusive premises Existential Necessity Four-term fallacy Illicit major Illicit minor Negative conclusion from affirmative premises Undistributed middle. As I explain in the Exposition section of the entry for the appeal to misleading authority, it's almost always possible to find eccentric scientists who take any position you like. However, I'm not sure if I am applying the fallacy correctly. When not produced by activists, statistics are often a product of government, which may be motivated in the opposite direction of the activists, namely, to play down a problem. It's normal for people to think poorly much of time and in many situations, especially when nothing of immediate serious consequence is at stake, and because it's normal none of us is immune. Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language 1st edition Writer Flawed Measurement pp. Types of propositional fallacies:. Perhaps a more apt, more critical title would come from the phrase: "figures don't lie, but liars can figure". The Universe will grant your every whim, but it doesn't understand negation. LIAR shows how to write an ambiguous letter which has two interpretations: Favorable enough to satisfy the subject of the recommendation. For instance, we all have a tendency to see patterns in random arrangements such as clouds and inkblots. Not much, but what there is falls into two categories: Appeals to authority: The book lists various great men of history who supposedly knew The Secret: The greatest teachers who have ever lived have told us that the law of attraction is the most powerful law in the Universe. The study of quantum physics helped me to have a deeper understanding of The Secret, on an energetic level. At mathematical operations, or even games such as chess or go, computers can now beat even the best people. Like Best, I hope that my readers will not turn into cynics but into critics. I actually learned some things from this book. If you haven't heard of record-smashing singer and songwriter Mariah Carey, is there any hope for you? A fallacy is reasoning that is logically incorrect, undermines the logical validity of an argument, or is recognized as unsound. Bad Definitions p. About S. Existential fallacy Illicit conversion Proof by example Quantifier shift. We are treated to more and more euphemisms slums are called "substandard housing"; dogcatchers, "animal welfare officers". Ruzuzu rated it really liked it Feb 28, Retrieved 21 December Here are some catty equivocations: For a coworker with a drinking problem: "We generally found him loaded with work to do. This makes it useful as a reference book on fallacies. Metalogic Metamathematics. In Shafer-Landau, Russ ed. Goodreads is the world's largest site for readers with over 50 million reviews. In a sense, we are too good at this task in that we err on the side of detecting patterns even when they aren't there. Archived from the original on February 5, Get A Copy. I hope that future historians and logicians will study this book carefully, with an eye to improving both fields. Main article: Informal fallacy. Flew, Antony Not only do others use data to fool us, we often fool ourselves. Mathematical logic Boolean algebra Set theory. Home Contact us Help Free delivery worldwide. Ad hominem Ad hominem tu quoque Appeal to accomplishment Appeal to authority Appeal to etymology Appeal to motive Appeal to nature Appeal to novelty Appeal to poverty Appeals to psychology Argumentum ad lapidem Appeal to the stone Appeal to tradition Appeal to wealth Association Bulverism Chronological snobbery Ipse dixit Poisoning the well Pro hominem Reductio ad Hitlerum. Namespaces Article Talk. Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language 1st edition Reviews Nifty Books. I'm not a physicist, so I will simply let you consult the two articles on quantum quackery listed in the Sources below. In this case, Byrne's claim is obviously wrong to anyone who is logically literate. Views Read Edit View history. All forms of human communication can contain fallacies. For that, see With Good Reason , above. A red herring fallacy, one of the main subtypes of fallacies of relevance, is an error in logic where a proposition is, or is intended to be, misleading in order to make irrelevant or false inferences. Community Reviews. See the Exposure section of the entry for the appeal to ignorance for more explanation and examples. But reel back, wind up, put everything you've got into it and it'll go much farther. Sign up now. Strictly speaking, neither is correct. For example, CTs have grown up around accidents, such as the death of Princess Diana, because people are unhappy when an important person dies from unintended causes. Main article: Formal fallacy. Another odd thing about The Secret is how concerned it is with making money. Blackwell Philosophy Anthologies. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy 2nd ed. See also irrelevant conclusion. Since Hagelin is a physicist we are supposed to be convinced that there is something scientific about The Secret. Affirming a disjunct Affirming the consequent Denying the antecedent Argument from fallacy False dilemma. Archived from the original on Why doesn't the Universe understand negation? Unfavorable, for the eyes of the prospective employer who knows how to read such double- speaking recommendations. Erin rated it liked it Apr 29, Kent Similarly, learning about logical fallacies may lead to the rejection of all argumentation as untrustworthy. Average rating 3. It has the second-longest list of fallacies of any book I know about: are listed in the index. The proportionality bias plays a role in many CTs, such as the granddaddy of all CTs, the assassination of President Kennedy: many people are reluctant to accept that a lone loser such as Lee Harvey Oswald could have murdered the most powerful man in the world. That's because it's not a textbook at all, but a book on statistics for us non-statisticians. Informal fallacies — arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural formal flaws and which usually require examination of the argument's content. This is a good reference book to keep on a handy shelf, but it also makes an entertaining read. Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language 1st edition Read Online When you read that a poll is "scientific" that means that it was conducted using random sampling, as opposed to convenience sampling. Conspiracy thinking is a type of fallacious thinking, and fallacious thinking is normal human thinking. The book is not only a useful manual of verbal self-defense, it's an engrossing study of the nature of language and the subtle ways in which it operates. Of course, if different sides are using contrary definitions of a problem, then each side's numbers may be right; but this won't be obvious if the different definitions are not reported, as is often the case.
Recommended publications
  • Chapter 2 Introduction to Classical Propositional

    Chapter 2 Introduction to Classical Propositional

    CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION TO CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC 1 Motivation and History The origins of the classical propositional logic, classical propositional calculus, as it was, and still often is called, go back to antiquity and are due to Stoic school of philosophy (3rd century B.C.), whose most eminent representative was Chryssipus. But the real development of this calculus began only in the mid-19th century and was initiated by the research done by the English math- ematician G. Boole, who is sometimes regarded as the founder of mathematical logic. The classical propositional calculus was ¯rst formulated as a formal ax- iomatic system by the eminent German logician G. Frege in 1879. The assumption underlying the formalization of classical propositional calculus are the following. Logical sentences We deal only with sentences that can always be evaluated as true or false. Such sentences are called logical sentences or proposi- tions. Hence the name propositional logic. A statement: 2 + 2 = 4 is a proposition as we assume that it is a well known and agreed upon truth. A statement: 2 + 2 = 5 is also a proposition (false. A statement:] I am pretty is modeled, if needed as a logical sentence (proposi- tion). We assume that it is false, or true. A statement: 2 + n = 5 is not a proposition; it might be true for some n, for example n=3, false for other n, for example n= 2, and moreover, we don't know what n is. Sentences of this kind are called propositional functions. We model propositional functions within propositional logic by treating propositional functions as propositions.
  • Constantinos Georgiou Athanasopoulos

    Constantinos Georgiou Athanasopoulos

    Constantinos Athanasopoulos, 1 Constantinos Georgiou Athanasopoulos Supervisor Mary Haight Title The Metaphysics of Intentionality: A Study of Intentionality focused on Sartre's and Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Mind and Language. Submission for PhD Department of Philosophy University of Glasgow JULY 1995 ProQuest Number: 13818785 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 13818785 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 GLASGOW UKVERSITT LIBRARY Constantinos Athanasopoulos, 2 ABSTRACT With this Thesis an attempt is made at charting the area of the Metaphysics of Intentionality, based mainly on the Philosophy of Jean-Paul Sartre. A Philosophical Analysis and an Evaluation o f Sartre’s Arguments are provided, and Sartre’s Theory of Intentionality is supported by recent commentaries on the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. Sartre’s Theory of Intentionality is proposed, with few improvements by the author, as the only modem theory of the mind that can oppose effectively the advance of AI and physicalist reductivist attempts in Philosophy of Mind and Language. Discussion includes Sartre’s critique of Husserl, the relation of Sartre’s Theory of Intentionality to Realism, its applicability in the Theory of the Emotions, and recent theories of Intentionality such as Mohanty’s, Aquilla’s, Searle’s, and Harney’s.
  • 35 Fallacies

    35 Fallacies

    THIRTY-TWO COMMON FALLACIES EXPLAINED L. VAN WARREN Introduction If you watch TV, engage in debate, logic, or politics you have encountered the fallacies of: Bandwagon – "Everybody is doing it". Ad Hominum – "Attack the person instead of the argument". Celebrity – "The person is famous, it must be true". If you have studied how magicians ply their trade, you may be familiar with: Sleight - The use of dexterity or cunning, esp. to deceive. Feint - Make a deceptive or distracting movement. Misdirection - To direct wrongly. Deception - To cause to believe what is not true; mislead. Fallacious systems of reasoning pervade marketing, advertising and sales. "Get Rich Quick", phone card & real estate scams, pyramid schemes, chain letters, the list goes on. Because fallacy is common, you might want to recognize them. There is no world as vulnerable to fallacy as the religious world. Because there is no direct measure of whether a statement is factual, best practices of reasoning are replaced be replaced by "logical drift". Those who are political or religious should be aware of their vulnerability to, and exportation of, fallacy. The film, "Roshomon", by the Japanese director Akira Kurisawa, is an excellent study in fallacy. List of Fallacies BLACK-AND-WHITE Classifying a middle point between extremes as one of the extremes. Example: "You are either a conservative or a liberal" AD BACULUM Using force to gain acceptance of the argument. Example: "Convert or Perish" AD HOMINEM Attacking the person instead of their argument. Example: "John is inferior, he has blue eyes" AD IGNORANTIAM Arguing something is true because it hasn't been proven false.
  • Colecția Erorilor De Argumentare

    Colecția Erorilor De Argumentare

    Colecția erorilor de argumentare 62 dintre cele mai comune erori de argumentare Este extrem de ușor să comiți o eroare atunci când ai sentimente puternice cu privire la subiectul tău - dacă o concluzie ți se pare evidentă, este mai probabil să presupui că este adevărată și să fii neglijent cu dovezile, spre exemplu. Pentru a te ajuta să vezi cum oamenii fac în mod frecvent aceste greșeli, acest document folosește o serie de exemple comune în spațiul public - argumente despre subiecte precum avortul, controlul armelor, pedeapsa cu moartea, căsătoria persoanelor de același sex, vaccinare etc. Scopul acestui document, totuși, nu este să argumenteze pentru o poziție cu privire la oricare dintre aceste probleme; mai degrabă, este pentru a ilustra raționamentul slab din spatele acestora; vei observa, probabil, că unele afirmații din exemplele alese pentru a ilustra aceste erori sunt, în mod evident, false. Dacă știi care sunt erorile, le poți evita în argumentele tale. Acest aspect îți oferă și o bază pentru evaluarea și criticarea argumentelor celorlalți. apelul la probabilitate O AFIRMAȚIE CONSIDERATĂ VALIDĂ DOAR PENTRU CĂ S-AR PUTEA SĂ FIE ADEVĂRATĂ. "CEVA S-AR PUTEA SĂ MEARGĂ PROST. apelul la PRIN URMARE, VA MERGE PROST" probabilitate ARGUMENT DIN EROARE SAU eroare în eroare PRESUPUNEREA CĂ, DACĂ UN ARGUMENT ESTE ERONAT, ATUNCI CONCLUZIA ESTE FALSĂ. "TOM: VORBESC ENGLEZĂ. PRIN URMARE, SUNT ENGLEZ. BEN: AMERICANII ȘI CANADIENII, PRINTRE ALȚII, VORBESC ENGLEZĂ. PRESUPUNÂND eroare în CĂ A VORBI ÎN ENGLEZĂ ȘI A FI ENGLEZ eroare MERG ÎNTOTDEAUNA ÎMPREUNĂ, TOCMAI AI COMIS O EROARE. PRIN URMARE, NU EȘTI ENGLEZ." BEN CONSIDERĂ CĂ BEN NU ESTE ENGLEZ DEOARECE ARGUMENTUL LUI ESTE ERONAT.
  • Fitting Words Textbook

    Fitting Words Textbook

    FITTING WORDS Classical Rhetoric for the Christian Student TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface: How to Use this Book . 1 Introduction: The Goal and Purpose of This Book . .5 UNIT 1 FOUNDATIONS OF RHETORIC Lesson 1: A Christian View of Rhetoric . 9 Lesson 2: The Birth of Rhetoric . 15 Lesson 3: First Excerpt of Phaedrus . 21 Lesson 4: Second Excerpt of Phaedrus . 31 UNIT 2 INVENTION AND ARRANGEMENT Lesson 5: The Five Faculties of Oratory; Invention . 45 Lesson 6: Arrangement: Overview; Introduction . 51 Lesson 7: Arrangement: Narration and Division . 59 Lesson 8: Arrangement: Proof and Refutation . 67 Lesson 9: Arrangement: Conclusion . 73 UNIT 3 UNDERSTANDING EMOTIONS: ETHOS AND PATHOS Lesson 10: Ethos and Copiousness .........................85 Lesson 11: Pathos ......................................95 Lesson 12: Emotions, Part One ...........................103 Lesson 13: Emotions—Part Two ..........................113 UNIT 4 FITTING WORDS TO THE TOPIC: SPECIAL LINES OF ARGUMENT Lesson 14: Special Lines of Argument; Forensic Oratory ......125 Lesson 15: Political Oratory .............................139 Lesson 16: Ceremonial Oratory ..........................155 UNIT 5 GENERAL LINES OF ARGUMENT Lesson 17: Logos: Introduction; Terms and Definitions .......169 Lesson 18: Statement Types and Their Relationships .........181 Lesson 19: Statements and Truth .........................189 Lesson 20: Maxims and Their Use ........................201 Lesson 21: Argument by Example ........................209 Lesson 22: Deductive Arguments .........................217
  • The Critical Thinking Toolkit

    The Critical Thinking Toolkit

    Galen A. Foresman, Peter S. Fosl, and Jamie Carlin Watson The CRITICAL THINKING The THE CRITICAL THINKING TOOLKIT GALEN A. FORESMAN, PETER S. FOSL, AND JAMIE C. WATSON THE CRITICAL THINKING TOOLKIT This edition first published 2017 © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Registered Office John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK Editorial Offices 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services, and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell. The right of Galen A. Foresman, Peter S. Fosl, and Jamie C. Watson to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.
  • The Justice Academy Journal Law and Justice Executive Series Special Edition

    The Justice Academy Journal Law and Justice Executive Series Special Edition

    The Justice Academy Journal Law and Justice Executive Series Special Edition Critical Thinking, Common Fallacies, and Leadership One of my all-time favorite movies was Tom Clancy’s, Hunt for Red October. Within that movie there is a scene that I found fascinating within my capacity as a university professor teaching logic and statistics. The scene involves a JusticeAcademy.org meeting of top level decision makers who are gathered around a table in the basement of the Whitehouse, and after a briefing given by Jack Ryan pertain- he Justice Academy serves as a national repository ing to the design, construction, and launch of a new Russian submarine, the and portal for instructional programs and special- ized training materials that are produced by law National Security Advisor who is chairing the meeting asks Admiral Greer enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and the (the character played by James Earl Jones) what conclusions he has made. courts and makes these educational assets availa- ble to the general law enforcement community, at The Admiral responded, “Sir, the data support no conclusions as of yet”. I no charge. thought this statement was one of the more profound expressions that I had JusticeAcademy.org also sponsors comprehensive research into a variety of issues relative to the law ever heard in any movie. What an astonishing and refreshing response I and justice professions, as well as authoring and thought to myself. He was exactly right that it was premature, given the lim- advancing national strategic initiatives that deal with specific challenges. The intention of this ited information available at the time, to base any decision about the Rus- service is to support professional development, sian’s intent, mission, or objectives.
  • Chapter 1 Elementary Logic

    Chapter 1 Elementary Logic

    Principles of Mathematics (Math 2450) A®Ë@ Õæ Aë áÖ ß @.X.@ 2017-2018 ÈðB@ É®Ë@ Chapter 1 Elementary Logic The study of logic is the study of the principles and methods used in distinguishing valid argu- ments from those that are not valid. The aim of this chapter is to help the student to understand the principles and methods used in each step of a proof. The starting point in logic is the term statement (or proposition) which is used in a technical sense. We introduce a minimal amount of mathematical logic which lies behind the concept of proof. In mathematics and computer science, as well as in many places in everyday life, we face the problem of determining whether something is true or not. Often the decision is easy. If we were to say that 2 + 3 = 4, most people would immediately say that the statement was false. If we were to say 2 + 2 = 4, then undoubtedly the response would be \of course" or \everybody knows that". However, many statements are not so clear. A statement such as \the sum of the first n odd integers is equal to n2" in addition to meeting with a good deal of consternation, might be greeted with a response of \Is that really true?" or \why?" This natural response lies behind one of the most important concepts of mathematics, that of proof. 1.1 Statements and their connectives When we prove theorems in mathematics, we are demonstrating the truth of certain statements. We therefore need to start our discussion of logic with a look at statements, and at how we recognize certain statements as true or false.
  • Chapter 4: INFORMAL FALLACIES I

    Chapter 4: INFORMAL FALLACIES I

    Essential Logic Ronald C. Pine Chapter 4: INFORMAL FALLACIES I All effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare necessities and then must be expressed in a few stereotyped formulas. Adolf Hitler Until the habit of thinking is well formed, facing the situation to discover the facts requires an effort. For the mind tends to dislike what is unpleasant and so to sheer off from an adequate notice of that which is especially annoying. John Dewey, How We Think Introduction In everyday speech you may have heard someone refer to a commonly accepted belief as a fallacy. What is usually meant is that the belief is false, although widely accepted. In logic, a fallacy refers to logically weak argument appeal (not a belief or statement) that is widely used and successful. Here is our definition: A logical fallacy is an argument that is usually psychologically persuasive but logically weak. By this definition we mean that fallacious arguments work in getting many people to accept conclusions, that they make bad arguments appear good even though a little commonsense reflection will reveal that people ought not to accept the conclusions of these arguments as strongly supported. Although logicians distinguish between formal and informal fallacies, our focus in this chapter and the next one will be on traditional informal fallacies.1 For our purposes, we can think of these fallacies as "informal" because they are most often found in the everyday exchanges of ideas, such as newspaper editorials, letters to the editor, political speeches, advertisements, conversational disagreements between people in social networking sites and Internet discussion boards, and so on.
  • Logical Fallacies and Distraction Techniques

    Logical Fallacies and Distraction Techniques

    Sample Activity Learning Critical Thinking Through Astronomy: Logical Fallacies and Distraction Techniques Joe Heafner [email protected] Version 2017-09-13 STUDENT NOTE PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT. 2017-09-13 Activity0105 CONTENTS Contents QuestionsSample Activity1 Materials Needed 1 Points To Remember 1 1 Fallacies and Distractions1 Student1.1 Lying................................................. Version 1 1.2 Shifting The Burden.........................................2 1.3 Appeal To Emotion.........................................3 1.4 Appeal To The Past.........................................4 1.5 Appeal To Novelty..........................................5 1.6 Appeal To The People (Appeal To The Masses, Appeal To Popularity).............6 1.7 Appeal To Logic...........................................7 1.8 Appeal To Ignorance.........................................8 1.9 Argument By Repetition....................................... 10 1.10 Attacking The Person........................................ 11 1.11 Confirmation Bias.......................................... 12 1.12 Strawman Argument or Changing The Subject.......................... 13 1.13 False Premise............................................. 14 1.14 Hasty Generalization......................................... 15 1.15 Loaded Question........................................... 16 1.16 Feigning Offense........................................... 17 1.17 False Dilemma............................................ 17 1.18 Appeal To Authority........................................
  • Reasoning in School

    Reasoning in School

    Reasoning in School For this I’m indebted to my Dad, who has over the years wisely entertained my impassioned ideas about education, to my Mom, whose empathy I’ve internalized, and to many liberal teachers. Preface A fifth grader taught me the word ‘metacognition’, which, following her, we can take to mean “thinking about thinking”. This is an analogical exercise in metacognition. It is secondarily an introduction to the process of reasoning and primarily an examination of basic notions about that process, especially those that are supposed commonsense and those that are missing from our self-concepts. As it turns out, subjecting popular metacognitive attitudes to even minor scrutiny calls some of them seriously into question. It is my goal to do so, and to form in the mind of the reader better founded beliefs about reasoning and thereby a more accurate, and consequently empowering, self-understanding. I would love to set in motion the mind that frees itself. I am in the end interested in reasoning in school as it relates to the practice of Philosophy for Children (p4c). It is amazing that reasoning is not a part of the K-12 curriculum. That it is not I find plainly unjustifiable and seriously unjust. In what follows I defend this position and consider p4c in light of it. Because I am focused on beliefs about thinking, as opposed to the cognitive psychology of thought, I am afforded some writing leeway. I am not a psychologist, but I have a fair metacognitive confidence thanks to my background in philosophy.

  • Infographic I.10

    The Digital Health Revolution: Leaving No One Behind The global AI in healthcare market is growing fast, with an expected increase from $4.9 billion in 2020 to $45.2 billion by 2026. There are new solutions introduced every day that address all areas: from clinical care and diagnosis, to remote patient monitoring to EHR support, and beyond. But, AI is still relatively new to the industry, and it can be difficult to determine which solutions can actually make a difference in care delivery and business operations. 59 Jan 2021 % of Americans believe returning Jan-June 2019 to pre-coronavirus life poses a risk to health and well being. 11 41 % % ...expect it will take at least 6 The pandemic has greatly increased the 65 months before things get number of US adults reporting depression % back to normal (updated April and/or anxiety.5 2021).4 Up to of consumers now interested in telehealth going forward. $250B 76 57% of providers view telehealth more of current US healthcare spend % favorably than they did before COVID-19.7 could potentially be virtualized.6 The dramatic increase in of Medicare primary care visits the conducted through 90% $3.5T telehealth has shown longevity, with rates in annual U.S. health expenditures are for people with chronic and mental health conditions. since April 2020 0.1 43.5 leveling off % % Most of these can be prevented by simple around 30%.8 lifestyle changes and regular health screenings9 Feb. 2020 Apr. 2020 OCCAM’S RAZOR • CONJUNCTION FALLACY • DELMORE EFFECT • LAW OF TRIVIALITY • COGNITIVE FLUENCY • BELIEF BIAS • INFORMATION BIAS Digital health ecosystems are transforming• AMBIGUITY BIAS • STATUS medicineQUO BIAS • SOCIAL COMPARISONfrom BIASa rea• DECOYctive EFFECT • REACTANCEdiscipline, • REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY • SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION • BACKFIRE EFFECT • ENDOWMENT EFFECT • PROCESSING DIFFICULTY EFFECT • PSEUDOCERTAINTY EFFECT • DISPOSITION becoming precise, preventive,EFFECT • ZERO-RISK personalized, BIAS • UNIT BIAS • IKEA EFFECT and • LOSS AVERSION participatory.