CH4 exercise 1

Classroom Updates and Schedule

  • Greetings and Plans

    • Opening remarks: Good afternoon, everyone.

    • Inquiry about weekend plans: Happy Wednesday; inquired about any exciting plans for the upcoming weekend.

    • Personal update: "I don't have much [planned]."

  • Class Structure for the Day

    • Focus on Chapter Four contents.

    • Exercises will be addressed, but it is not one class endeavor.

    • Expectation to cover "most of think probably the rest of what's there in section one for exercise one" during the current session.

    • Exercise two will be tackled on the following Monday.

  • Future Classes

    • New material from Chapter Five to commence early next week.

    • Correction on exam date: It will be in two weeks, around the 15th (Wednesday).

    • Review sheet: Will be provided next week; crucial for exam preparation.

Importance of Exercises
  • Importance stressed on doing exercises individually as preparation for the exam.

Fallacy Discussion (Exercises)

  • Fallacy Types

    • C:

    • Example: "The journalist who writes all this article about global warming drives an RV…"

    • Restructured Argument: "The journalist drives an RV, therefore, their argument about global warming is invalid."

    • Identified fallacy: Circumstantial Ad Hominem.

    • Explanation: Relevant because the journalist's background affects the credibility of their argument about greenhouse effects.

  • D:

    • Example: "It's okay to take advantage of all those tax loopholes…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Other people take advantage of tax loopholes; therefore, it's acceptable for me to do so too."

    • Identified fallacy: Two Wrong don’t make a right.

    • Explanation: Justification based on others acting immorally does not make the action right.

  • E:

    • Example: "Our organization ought to implement affirmative action policies for women…"

    • Restructured Argument: "You want to implement affirmative action policies for women, implying you only care about women and not about merit; therefore, your proposal is flawed."

    • Identified fallacy: Straw Person or possibly Ad Hominem.

    • Explanation: Distortion of opposing argument focusing on character instead of argument's validity.

  • F:

  • Example: "Echinacea is excellent for colds. Everyone should take it. My friend Gina takes it…"

  • Restructured Argument: "My friend Gina took Echinacea and it helped her cold; therefore, Echinacea is excellent for everyone and everyone should take it."

  • Identified fallacy: Anecdotal evidence or Hasty Generalization.

  • Explanation: Using a single case (Gina's experience) to make a general claim about efficacy.

  • G:

    • Example: "I always believe the stories Lee tells me…"

    • Restructured Argument: "I believe Lee's stories because Lee is a reliable person, and I know Lee is reliable because I always believe their stories."

    • Identified fallacy: Begging the Question (Circular Reasoning).

    • Explanation: "Reliable" is asserted without independent justification.

  • H:

    • Example: "I don't support vegetarianism…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Vegetarianism is often supported by radical activists; therefore, I don't support vegetarianism."

    • Identified fallacy: Guilt by Association or Abusive Ad Hominem.

    • Explanation: Discrediting an argument based on the speaker's character or associated groups.

  • I:

    • Example: "People who aren't working don't want to work…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Those business people I know say that people who aren't working simply don't want to work; therefore, it is true that people who aren't working don't want to work."

    • Identified fallacy: Hasty Generalization.

    • Explanation: Generalization based on anecdotal evidence from business people's opinions.

  • J:

    • Example: "One shouldn't believe everything about animal treatment; it’s propaganda from animal rights activists…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Information about animal mistreatment comes from animal rights activists, who are biased; therefore, that information should not be believed."

    • Identified fallacy: Ad Hominem.

    • Explanation: Character attack rather than addressing the argument regarding animal treatment.

  • K:

    • Example: "It’s not right that people are mistreated…"

    • Restructured Argument: "You are concerned about animal mistreatment, but human mistreatment is also an issue; therefore, your concern about animal mistreatment is misplaced."

    • Identified fallacy: Red Herring.

    • Explanation: Introducing unrelated argument about human mistreatment distracts from original issue of animal mistreatment.

  • L:

    • Example: "You can't rely on college students to be punctual…"

    • Restructured Argument: "I had a bad experience with a few college students being late; therefore, all college students are unreliable when it comes to punctuality."

    • Identified fallacy: Hasty Generalization.

    • Explanation: Generalizing about all college students from a single negative experience.

Further Fallacies
  • M:

    • Example: "Arguments against pit bulls are irrelevant because of worse human issues…"

    • Restructured Argument: "There are worse human issues in the world than concerns about pit bulls; therefore, arguments against pit bulls are irrelevant."

    • Identified fallacy: Red Herring.

    • Explanation: Distracts from the specific argument about pit bull safety.

  • N:

    • Example: "Women accused of adultery in Iran are stoned…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Women accused of adultery in Iran have traditionally been stoned; therefore, stoning women accused of adultery is justified."

    • Identified fallacy: Appeal to Tradition.

    • Explanation: Justifying action based on long-standing tradition without moral basis.

  • O:

    • Example: "Men are not capable of being faithful…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Based on my personal experiences, some men have not been faithful; therefore, all men are not capable of being faithful."

    • Identified fallacy: Hasty Generalization.

    • Explanation: Deducing a conclusion about all men based on personal experiences.

  • P:

    • Example: "Tom has spoken against the invasions…"

    • Restructured Argument: "Tom spoke against the invasions, which implies he supports terrorism; therefore, Tom is a supporter of terrorism."

    • Identified fallacy: Straw Person.

    • Explanation: Misrepresenting Tom's argument by claiming he supports terrorism.

Wrap Up
  • Next Steps: - Work on remaining exercises over the weekend.

    • Start reading Chapter Five in anticipation of new material to be introduced next Monday.

  • Upcoming class activities: - Additional exercises and new argument types to be discussed.

  • Resources: - Review sheets will soon be available to guide exam preparation.