Reason

Contents of page:
 * Review of Concepts
 * Deductive Reasoning
 * Inductive Reasoning
 * Logical Fallacies





Reason as a way of knowing. Introduction activity:

=First, a review of key TOK concepts: = 1. Name the four TOK Ways of Knowing. 2. Differentiate between a Way of Knowing and an Area of Knowledge in TOK. 3. In the TOK context, what exactly is a “Knowledge Issue”?



Basically, knowledge issues are:
 * An open-ended question
 * Explicitly about knowledge
 * Couched in terms of TOK vocabulary and concepts (For these purposes, these are taken to be the areas of knowledge, the ways of knowing and these concepts —belief, certainty, culture, evidence, experience, explanation, interpretation, intuition, justification, truth and values.)
 * Precise in terms of relationships between these concepts

Now, we're going to do solve a few brainteasers to get warmed up: http://www.tokresource.org/tok_classes/ways/systematic_thinking/index.htm

 If she weighs the same as a duck... she's made of wood!  [|Trials by Ordeal] were a method of determining guilt or innocence by putting the accused through various torturous experiences. Today these approaches [|are frequently-mocked] and banned almost everywhere, though [|Sassywood] remains common in Liberia. However, economist Peter Leeson argues that [|trial by ordeal may have been a very effective way of dispensing justice], especially when courts and juries were expensive or broken. According to [|the paper] [PDF], a superstitious belief in //iudicium Dei//, or the justice of God, may have discouraged the guilty from ordeals, while tilting the scales in favor of the innocent - echoes of the practice persist today in [|swearing on a Bible]. [|Even Sassywood] [pdf] may be better than Liberia's broken justice system.

=Good deductive reasoning activities= http://www.brighthubeducation.com/high-school-math-lessons/8544-some-fun-geometry-practice-using-deductive-reasoning/ http://www.brighthubeducation.com/lesson-plans-grades-1-2/100945-three-deductive-reasoning-activities-and-resources/ http://www.schoolexpress.com/fws/cat.php?id=2345

=Valid versus True Syllogisms=

=Deductive Reasoning and Nature of Knowledge - Vocab Review=

=Inductive Reasoning=



How reliable is inductive reasoning?
http://prezi.com/jzr_dwoumw0a/do-you-generalize/

- we tend to make //hasty generalizations//, in which we jump to conclusions on the basis of insufficient evidence - example - if you meet a rude French person, you might generalize and jump to the conclusion that all French people are rude - if a female pilot crashes her jet, her male colleague might conclude that women are unfit to fly planes - this could lead to racist or sexist attitudes

- so, even the most solid generalizations are still uncertain (an apple might make you sick tomorrow, or you might get bit by the dog, or your chair may collapse when you sit on it)

- What was the generalization that you learned about at the beginning of this unit on inductive reasoning?

- confirmation bias makes these hasty generalizations even worse - because, you may meet a perfectly nice and polite French person, but see them as arrogant and not change your attitude, overlooking the evidence against this prejudice

- look at the questions on page 122

Group activity - What distinguishes good generalizations?
Inductive reasoning is about making generalizations. But remember, sometimes we make hasty generalizations! (what's an example? - make a powerpoint!) How do we avoid making hasty generalizations? There are five good criteria to help. We will use this class and the next to see how they work.

Directions:
 * 1) Get into groups of four. Choose roles: materials manager, time manager, directions manager, secretary/scribe (everyone must contribute creatively) - secretary, record roles please
 * 2) Each group will randomly choose two non-consecutive numbers between 1-5. Each number corresponds to a criterion.
 * 3) Represent both criteria graphically. It can be a concept map, a poster, a sculpture, an interpretive dance, a song, a play/skit. Your group will have twenty minutes to put together the work in class, and then a few minutes to briefly explain it to the rest.

Grading criteria:
- must accurately and thoroughly present the information, including all main points - be creative: product is unique and does not look like the others; shows creativity that works (is not just weird, but is exciting and fresh) - effort - the project shows that much effort went into it; the project looks complete; all the parts work as intended (if applicable)

=Informal Logic - Logical Fallacies=









media type="custom" key="24791672"

media type="custom" key="24791650" What, if any, mistakes are being made in the arguments? The class should come to some agreement as to why the ad is an example of a particular sort of fallacy or booby-trap. Identify the fallacy/fallacies presented in each ad (identify the argument presented, as well as the premises). Ask yourselves, “What am I supposed to believe after I watch this ad?” and “Why do they ask me to believe it?”

1.Clip 1, Lexus “Moments.” This ad is fairly typical of a whole class of commercial advertisements. It is one long (very well done) red herring. The general approach is always the same: Invoke a number of positive images and then place your product at the very end. Many ads use sex in this way (e.g., Axe commercials, most beer commercials, Hardee’s/Carl’s Jr. ads, etc.) The Lexus spot provides quick cuts of multiple good images, with corresponding voice-over. At the end viewers are invited to savor all of life’s moments…while being treated to an image of a Lexus driving down the road.

2. Clip 2, Coca-Cola, “No More Regrets for Old Man.” This is a (humorous) instance of a false cause fallacy. In the commercial, drinking a Coke causes the old man to go out and do all the things that he’s never done before. Obviously, though, there is no evidence that drinking a Coke will actually cause this sort of behavior.

media type="custom" key="24811668"

3. Clip, “Bush-Hitler.” This is a special instance of the genetic fallacy, one common enough that some lists of fallacies include it as a separate instance. The basic structure of the argument is something like the following: •Person X did/said/believed some particular thing Y. •Hitler also did/said/believed Y. •Therefore, we ought to reject Y. OR •Therefore, person X is just as bad as Hitler. The first of those conclusions is a genetic fallacy. The second possible conclusion is an undistributed middle. The “Bush-Hitler” ad is doing the second of those two things.

media type="custom" key="24906012"

media type="custom" key="24906150"

media type="custom" key="24906246"

Homework: journal. Write a journal entry of at least two good paragraphs. Talk about how you feel about the fallacies that we've been researching, particularly the one your group chose. Due Monday.

This website has good, perhaps politically-minded, examples of most of the fallacies we cover: www.yourlogicalfallacyis.com

Logical fallacies with examples
commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm

logical fallacies book https://bookofbadarguments.com/?view=allpages

=Looking at Who Uses Logic — and How (How logic helps you)= By Mark Zegarelli With all the restrictions placed upon it, you may think that logic is too narrow to be of much use. But this narrowness is logic's great strength. Logic is like a laser — a tool whose best use is not illumination, but rather focus. A laser may not provide light for your home, but, like logic, its great power resides in its precision. The following sections describe just a few areas in which logic is commonly used.

Pick a number (math)
Mathematics is tailor-made to use logic in all its power. In fact, logic is one of the three theoretical legs that math stands on. (The other two are set theory and number theory, if you're wondering.) Logic and math work so well together because they're both independent from reality and because they're tools that are used to help people make sense of the world. For example, reality may contain three apples or four bananas, but the ideas of //three// and //four// are abstractions, even though they're abstractions that most people take for granted. Math is made completely of such abstractions. When these abstractions get complicated — at the level of algebra, calculus, and beyond — logic can be called on to help bring order to their complexities. Mathematical ideas such as number, sum, fraction, and so on are clearly defined without exceptions. That's why statements about these ideas are much easier to verify than a statement about reality, such as "People are generally good at heart" or even "All ravens are black."

Fly me to the moon (science)
Science uses logic to a great advantage. Like math, science uses abstractions to make sense of reality and then applies logic to these abstractions. The sciences attempt to understand reality by: 1. Reducing reality to a set of abstractions, called a model. 2. Working within this model to reach a conclusion. 3. Applying this conclusion back to reality again. Logic is instrumental during the second step, and the conclusions that science attains are, not surprisingly, logical conclusions. This process is most successful when a good correlation exists between the model and reality and when the model lends itself well to the type of calculations that logic handles comfortably. The areas of science that rely most heavily on logic and math are the //quantifiable sciences//, such as physics, engineering, and chemistry. The //qualitative sciences// — biology, physiology, and medicine — use logic but with a bit less certainty. Finally, the //social sciences// — such as psychology, sociology, and economics — are the sciences whose models bear the least direct correlation to reality, which means they tend to rely less on pure logic.

Switch on or off (computer science)
Medicine used to be called the youngest science, but now that title has been handed over to computer science. A huge part of the success of the computer revolution rests firmly on logic. Every action your computer completes happens because of a complex structure of logical instructions. At the hardware level — the physical structure of the machine — logic is instrumental in the design of complex circuits that make the computer possible. And, at the software level — the programs that make computers useful — computer languages based on logic provide for the endless versatility that sets the computer apart from all other machines.

Tell it to the judge (law)
As with mathematics, laws exist primarily as sets of definitions: //contracts, torts, felonies, intent to cause bodily harm//, and so on. These concepts all come into being on paper and then are applied to specific cases and interpreted in the courts. A legal definition provides the basis for a legal argument, which is similar to a logical argument. For example, to demonstrate copyright infringement, a plaintiff may need to show that the defendant published a certain quantity of material under his own name, for monetary or other compensation, when this writing was protected by a preexisting copyright. These criteria are similar to the premises in a logical argument: If the premises are found to be true, the conclusion — that the defendant has committed copyright infringement — must also be true.

Find the meaning of life (philosophy)
Logic had its birth in philosophy and is often still taught as an offshoot of philosophy rather than math. Aristotle invented logic as a method for comprehending the underlying structure of reason, which he saw as the motor that propelled human attempts to understand the universe in the widest possible terms. As with science, philosophy relies on models of reality to help provide explanations for what we see. Because the models are rarely mathematical, however, philosophy tends to lean more toward rhetorical logic than mathematical logic.

These are the answers to Study Guide #2, Logical Fallacies: 1.loaded question 2. Invalid syllogism 3. False dilemma 4. invalid syllogism 5. ad ignorantium 6. False analogy 7. Argument ad ignorantium 8. false dilemma

9. Valid (but not necessarily true)

Additional resources for reasoning and logic: Deductive reasoning: [] Logical fallacies: commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm [|https://bookofbadarguments.com/?][|view=allpages] __ h __ ttp://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.html