1. Reason Pt. 2

2. Inductive Reasoning Induction moves from the particular to the general. As a result, it involves generalizing: moving from observable facts to unobservable suppositions by assuming.

3. Consider the following: How do you know that some day you will die? How do you know that all metal expands when it is heated? How do you know that eating school food will not poison you? How do you know that Mr. Pessoa will not punch you in the face the next time he sees you?

4. These, along with thousands of other assumptions, we have to take for granted so as not to be bogged down with the weight of considering every single possibility endlessly.

5. Language is necessarily inductive. (For example, by referring similar things by names, we are generalizing their “identities” – I can explain this better in person.)

6. Deduction vs. Induction D: Reasoning from general to particular I: Reasoning from particular to general D: All metals expand when heated. Iron is a metal. Therefore, iron expands when it is heated. I: Iron, a metal, expands when heated. Steel, a metal, expands when heated. Gold, a metal, expands when heated. Therefore all metals expand when heated. D: More certain, but less informative than induction. I: More informative, but less certain than deduction.

7. The danger of relying too heavily on induction is that we may make hasty generalizations.

8. Informal Reasoning The following are logical fallacies which appear frequently in arguments and discussions.

9. Post hoc ergo propter hoc Assuming that because one thing (B) following another thing (A), then A must be the cause of B. In other words, it involves confusing correlation with causation.

10. EXAMPLE Statistically speaking it is true that as the number of churches in American cities increases, so does the number of prostitutes. How can we explain this?

11. Ad hominem fallacy “against the man” This involves attacking the person rather than the argument. Example: If I argue that teachers should earn higher salaries, and you reject my argument on the grounds that I am a teacher, you are committing this fallacy.

12. Circular reasoning Consists in assuming the truth of something you are supposed to be using. What looks at first like an argument ends up being just a reassertion of the original position.

13. EXAMPLE Three thieves are arguing about how to divide up the seven pearls they have stolen. One of them picks up the pearls and gives two to each of the other two, keeping three for himself. One of the other men says “How come you have kept three?” “Because I am the leader.” “Oh. But how come you are the leader?” “Because I have more pearls than you.”

14. Special pleading Involves the use of double standards: justifying your behavior with standards that you would not accept for other people.

15. Equivocation Is a fallacy that occurs when a word is used in two different senses in an argument. Example: A hamburger is better than nothing. Nothing is better than good health. Therefore, a hamburger is better than good health.

16. Argument ad ignorantium Claiming that something is true on the grounds that there is no evidence to disprove it. Example: McCarthyism.

17. False analogy Arises when you assume that because two things are similar in some respects they must also be similar in some further respect. Example: “Just as in time the gentle rain can wear down the tallest mountain, so, in human life, can all problems be solved by patience and quiet persistence.”

18. False dilemma Assuming that only two alternatives exist when there is in fact a wider range of options. Example: “Do those who advocate an increase in military expenditure really want to see our schools and hospitals close?”

19. Loaded questions Contains built-in assumptions that have not been justified and may be false. Example: “Do you always cheat in exams?” This works for statements too: “The headmaster was not drunk today.”