ethics midterm- moral reasoning and arugments

arugment

a group of statements where the conclusion is supported by the premises

deductive

conclusion must be true if the premises are true

inductive

the stronger the premises the more likely the conclusion is true

moral premises

statements that express what is right, wrong, good, bad

evidence

facts that support the truth of a statement

fallacies of logic

mistakes in reasoning that weaken an argument

moral argument

conclusion is a moral statement, has one moral and one nonmoral premise

obstacles to critical reasoning

denying contrary evidence, looking for confirming evidence, motivated reasoning, preferring available evidence, dunning-kurger effect, laws of stupidity

denying contrary evidence

rejecting evidence that contradicts ones beliefs

looking for confirming evidence

actively seeking information that supports pre-existing beliefs (confirmation bias)

motivated reasoning

forming conclusions based on what you want to believe rather than facts

preferring available evidence

giving disproportionate weight to readily available information, even if incomplete of unrepresentative

dunning-kruger effect

overestimating one’s knowledge or abilities in areas where they lack competence

laws of human stupidity

an insightful framework explaining how stupidity impacts decision-making

helpless

benefits others but harm themselves

bandits

benefit themselves by harming others

intelligent

benefit both themselves and others

stupid

harm others without benefiting themselves

first law ubiquity of stupidity

everyone inevitably underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation

second law independent of other qualities

the probability a certain person is stupid is independent of any other charecteristic of that person

third law harm without gain

a stupid person causes losses to others while deriving no gain and possibly incurring losses themselves

fourth law underestimating the danger

non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals

fifth law stupidity as the greatest threat

a stupid person is the most dangerous type of person

straw man

misinterpreting/oversimplifying someones arguement to make it easier to refute

appeal to the person

attacking the character/ motives of the person making an argument instead of addressing the argument itself

appeal to ignorance

claiming something is true or false because it has not yet been proven otherwise

begging the question

assuming the truth of the conclusion within the premises rather than proving it

red herring

introducing an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the actual issue

appeal to tradition

arguing that something should continue because it has always been done that way

slippery slope

asserting that a small action will inevitably lead to extreme and undesirable outcomes

sunk cost fallacy

continuing a course of action because of past investment, even if its no longer beneficial

appeal to hypocrisy

dismissing someones argument because their actions contradict their position

personal incredulity

dismissing an arguement or claim as utrue or invalid because it seems too difficult to understand or believe