MODR 1770 Lecture Notes - Argument From Analogy, Epithet, Theocracy

48 views3 pages

salmonreindeer464

10 Oct 2012

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Fallacy of presumption falls under the sufficiency criterion. They occur in three types of cases: where the facts were overlooked, one evades the evidence, one distorts the evidence. He"s deleted strawman, red herring, amphiboly, and irrelevant thesis. Exercises: conclusion: you shouldn"t oppose the proposal to amalgamate with the. Canadian chiropractic college: p1: the president and dean are strongly in favour of it. P2: you haven"t received tenure from them yet. Exercises #2: you support promiscuity, p1: you"ve never had a good relationship with a man. Taking a rule and you generalize it without taking any context into consideration. You have a small sample of evidence, and you extract a generalization out of it. The evidence might be relevant and acceptable, but it"s not enough. These are where most stereotypes stem from. It takes two things that are contrary, and treat them as contradiction. This is a fallacy because they do not take the middle considerations.

Related Questions

Annika is a female neonate born at 37 weeks of gestion to a G2-P1 mother who for the past 3 months has been taking morphine for chronic pancreatitis. following a spontaneous vaginal birth, Annika receives Apgar scores of 5 at 1minutes and 8 at 5minutes.Annika is active and alert. in caring for this neonate and her mother you will need to detremine a plan for monitoring Annika for signs of drug withdrawal. 1 Evidence - Is there sufficient evidence to draw conclusions about an appropriate plan for monitoring and treating Annika. 2. Assumptions - Describe underlying assumptions about each of the following issues.

( a) symptoms of narcotic withdrawal. ( b) Tools for assessing an infant with Nacotic withdrawal. (c) Recommendations for managing an infant with narcotic withdrawal.

3. what implications and priorities for nursing care can be drawn at this time.

4. Does the evidence objectively support your conclusion.

5. Are there alternative perspectives to your conclusion.

6. What are the 3 nursing diagnosis and interventions for this case.

Pickett KE, Kelly S, Brunner E, et al. published an ecological study in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health in 2005 titled Wider income gaps, wider waistbands? An ecological study of obesity and income inequality. According to the methods section of the study aggregate data was collected from the populations of 21 countries worldwide on income inequality and three outcomes: the proportion of males and females who were obese, diabetes morality rate, and calorie intake. Then statistical methods were used to measure the associations between income inequality and each outcome. The following conclusion was stated in the abstract of the article âObesity, diabetes mortality, and calorie consumption were associated with income inequality in developed countries.â

In your own words explain why this ecological study is an analytical study. Use evidence from the information provided above to support your reasoning. (4 pts)

Why is this study considered an ecological study design? (Hint: It is not related to whether the study is descriptive or analytic) (2 pts)

What is an ecological fallacy? (2 pts)

What would the ecological fallacy be for this study? (2 pts)

Would you like 2 points for making it halfway through the midterm?

A statement that is necessarily false, or a group of statements that, taken together, are inconsistent. A) Division B) Suppression C) Questionable Cause D) Contradiction 2. An attack on oneâs opponent rather than oneâs opponentâs argument. A) Faulty Comparison B) Categorical Proposition C) False Dilemma D) Ad Hominem Argument 3. Consciously believing at a deeper level what we know to be dubious. A) Mood B) Conclusion C) Self-Deception D) Irrelevant Reason 4. A limited perspective shaped by the ideas, interests, and kinds of behavior favored by the groups with which we identify. A) Provincialism B) Delusional C) Composition D) Tokenism 5. Drawing conclusions about a population on the basis of a sample that is too small to be a reliable measure of that population. A) Minor Term B) Small Sample C) Suppressed Evidence D) Rationalization 6. Is the following argument valid or invalid? If valid, explain whether it is deductive or inductive. If invalid, explain why: âMr. Michaels believes that he is the only person on the ballot capable of running our town. He says so time and again in his campaign speeches and ads. What he fails to mention is that he is an alcoholic womanizer with no scruples. Who in their right mind could vote for that?â HTML Editor 7. The fallacy in which it is assumed parts of an item have a particular property because the item as a whole has that property. A) Premise B) Indirect Proof C) Division D) Unrepresentative Sample 8. The fallacious drawing of a conclusion from relevant but insufficient evidence. A) Appeal to Authority B) Hasty Conclusion C) Loyalty D) Middle Term 9. Valid reasoning from justified (warranted) premises that include all likely relevant information. A) Guilt by Association B) Indirect Proof C) Cogent Reasoning D) Contradiction 10. A comparison of one thing to another based on a perceived similarity. A) Indirect Proof B) Analogy C) Two Wrongs Make a Right D) Questionable Cause 11. Is the following argument valid or invalid? If valid, explain whether it is deductive or inductive. If invalid, explain why: âMrs. Kelvin has accused me of intentionally denting her rear fender. I neither confirm nor deny this, however in telling her story she leaves out an important point. As we were both leaving our driveways that morning, I backed onto the street first. She saw this and then deliberately pulled in front of my vehicle as I was preparing to continue down the street. Mrs. Kelvin intended to cut me off, so what happened to her car was entirely her fault.â HTML Editor 12. Is the following argument valid or invalid? If valid, explain whether it is deductive or inductive. If invalid, explain why: âAfter careful consideration, it is the determination of the board that free soda will no longer be provided in the break room. Before making this decision, a survey was distributed amongst all members of the upper management to determine their opinion on the matter. Based on the majority of responses, it was evident that withdrawing the free soda will not have any significant negative effect on morale.â HTML Editor 13. Use of a term in a passage to mean one thing in one place and something else in another. A) Cogent Reasoning B) Superstition C) Equivocation D) Inconsistent

MODR 1770 Lecture Notes - Argument From Analogy, Epithet, Theocracy

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

MODR 1770 Lecture Notes - Profit Margin, Argument From Analogy, Syntactic Ambiguity

Related Questions