1. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Lecture Notes Chapter 12

2. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Overview Fallacious Assumptions Fallacies of Inductions

3. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacious Assumptions False dilemma fallacy Loaded questions Informal fallacy of innuendo Informal fallacy of begging the question or circular reasoning

4. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacious Assumptions False dilemma fallacy: a fallacy of underestimating or under-representing the number of possible alternative positions on a given issue.

5. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacious Assumptions Loaded Questions: a question is so worded that you can't answer it without also granting a particular answer to some other question.

6. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacious Assumptions Innuendo: a fallacy in which a judgment is implied, usually derogatory, by hinting.

7. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacious Assumptions Begging the question or circular reasoning: a fallacy of assuming or presupposing one's conclusion as a premise.

8. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction Generalizations Small sample Unrepresentative sample Bad baseline Analogies False analogies Arguing ad ignorantiam Hypothetical and causal reasoning Jumping from correlation to cause Post hoc ergo propter hoc Overlooking a common cause Oversimplification Gambler’s fallacy Slippery slope

9. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Generalizations Small sample: a fallacy of statistical inference consisting of overestimating the statistical significance of evidence drawn from a small number of cases.

10. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Generalizations Unrepresentative sample: a fallacy of statistical inference in which the sample under-represents the range of relevant variables in the population

11. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Generalizations Bad baseline: a fallacy of statistical inference based on an inappropriate basis of comparison.

12. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Analogies False analogy –An argument based on similarities that are irrelevant to the conclusion –An argument that glosses over relevant differences

13. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Analogies Arguing ad ignorantiam: a fallacy of inferring a statement from the absence of evidence or lack of proof of its opposite.

14. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Hypothetical and causal reasoning Jumping from correlation to cause: a variety of causal fallacy in which an observed statistical correlation is interpreted as showing a causal connection without first having made a reasonable attempt to isolate the cause by controlling the relevant variables experimentally.

15. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Hypothetical and causal reasoning Post hoc ergo propter hoc: a variety of causal fallacy in which order of events in time is taken to establish a cause and effect relationship.

16. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Hypothetical and causal reasoning Overlooking a common cause: a variety of causal fallacy in which one of two effects of some common cause is taken to cause the other.

17. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Hypothetical and causal reasoning Causal oversimplification: a variety of causal fallacy in which significant causal factors or variables are overlooked.

18. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Hypothetical and causal reasoning Gambler’s fallacy: any of a variety of fallacies of inductive reasoning having to do with estimating or beating the odds, often based on the use of past outcomes to predict the future outcome of chance events.

19. Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 12 Fallacies of Induction: Hypothetical and causal reasoning Slippery slope: a fallacy consisting of objecting to something on the grounds that it will lead, by dubious causal reasoning, to some unacceptable set of consequences.