4,993
edits
Social Studies skills: Difference between revisions
→Logic
(→Logic) |
|||
| Line 782: | Line 782: | ||
== Logic == | == Logic and observational fallacies == | ||
==== Benchmark fallacy ==== | |||
* a logical or statistical fallacy that measures incompatible data or other comparison point ("benchmark") | |||
* examples: | |||
** using a date of reference (benchmark) in order to hide a statistical trend from its true nature | |||
*** also called "cherry-picking" of dates or data | |||
** commonly used by stock market observers in order to exaggerate or minimize the extent of a stock's rise or fall | |||
** commonly used by politicians to make claims for or against themselves or opponents, such as: | |||
click EXPAND for an example of a benchmark fallacy | |||
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"> | |||
Ex. | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
|+ '''Housing Starts 2000-2021 selected years ''' | |||
|- | |||
| 2000 || 2006 || 2009 || 2015 || 2021 | |||
|- | |||
| 1.65 mm || 2.25mm|| 0.50 mm || 1.2mm || 1.7 mm | |||
|} | |||
* mm = millions | |||
* numbers are approximate | |||
** source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/housing-starts | |||
* benchmark fallacies using this data might include: | |||
** a politician wanting to exaggerate a ''decline'' in housing starts might select 2005 as the benchmark date for 2021 rates (thus 2021 would have a lower rate of housing starts than 2005); conversely, | |||
** a politician wanting to exaggerate a ''rise'' in housing starts might select 2009 as the benchmark date for 2021 rates (thus 2021 would have a higher rate of housing starts than 2009) | |||
</div> | |||
=== Confirmation bias === | |||
* drawing a conclusion not from evidence but from what one wants to observe | |||
** seeing only what you want to see | |||
* confirmation bias impacts all areas of human thought, including | |||
** scientists who ignore or deny contrary evidence | |||
** politicians who take only one side of a political question even against evidence that negates it | |||
** historians who are biased toward certain historical outcomes | |||
* origins of the idea of confirmation bias | |||
** Aesop's fable: Fox and the Grapes, which is where we get the expression, "sour grapes" ("oh well, those grapes are probably sour") | |||
todo: | |||
** Biblical stories | |||
** David Hume | |||
=== Heinlein's Razor === | |||
* “Never assume malice when incompetence will do” | |||
**from wiki: A similar quotation appears in Robert A. Heinlein's 1941 short story "Logic of Empire" ("You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"); this was noticed in 1996 (five years before Bigler identified the Robert J. Hanlon citation) and first referenced in version 4.0.0 of the Jargon File,[3] with speculation that Hanlon's Razor might be a corruption of "Heinlein's Razor". "Heinlein's Razor" has since been defined as variations on Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice.[4] Yet another similar epigram ("Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence") has been widely attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte.[5] Another similar quote appears in Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774): "...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent." | |||
=== necessary and sufficient conditions === | === necessary and sufficient conditions === | ||
| Line 792: | Line 835: | ||
** however, sufficiency does not exclude other conclusions | ** however, sufficiency does not exclude other conclusions | ||
*** example: "John is a bachelor" is sufficient evidence to know that he is a male | *** example: "John is a bachelor" is sufficient evidence to know that he is a male | ||
=== Normalcy bias === | |||
* a bias towards continuation of what is or has normally been | |||
* given absence of change, a normalcy bias is accurate | |||
** only it's accurate until it's not | |||
* we can see across history when civilizations, peoples, or leaders counted on things "staying the same" | |||
** consequences can be | |||
*** catastrophic systemic breakdown without preparation for change | |||
**** examples include, Ancient Egypt, Roman Empire, various Chinese dynasties | |||
*** lack of social, economic, cultural, and technological advance | |||
**** which unto itself becomes a source of breakdown, esp. vis-a-vis competitive societies | |||
**** see "stability v. change" above | |||
=== Occam's Razor === | === Occam's Razor === | ||
| Line 812: | Line 869: | ||
* note: Occam's Razor has been used by philosophers to deny any explanations that include God or religion (see "Blame it on Calvin & Luther," by Barton Swaim, Wall Street Journal, Jan 14, 2012) | * note: Occam's Razor has been used by philosophers to deny any explanations that include God or religion (see "Blame it on Calvin & Luther," by Barton Swaim, Wall Street Journal, Jan 14, 2012) | ||
=== | === Sutton's law === | ||
* | * from the bank robber Willie Sutton who, when asked why he robbed banks | ||
** he replied, "Because that's where the money is." | |||
** | * seek first the most obvious answer first | ||
* used in Medical school to teach students best practices on diagnosis and testing | |||
* | |||
* | |||
== Logical fallacies and tricks == | |||
* begging the question | * begging the question | ||
* broken leg fallacy | * broken leg fallacy | ||
| Line 865: | Line 896: | ||
* see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies | * see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies | ||
=== Kafka Trap ==== | |||
* a logical trap whereby the argument uses its own refutation as evidence of a fallacy | * a logical trap whereby the argument uses its own refutation as evidence of a fallacy | ||
** i.e., "because you deny it, it must be true" | ** i.e., "because you deny it, it must be true" | ||
| Line 905: | Line 910: | ||
*** and the story of the Slave Boy and the Square from Plato's ''Meno'' | *** and the story of the Slave Boy and the Square from Plato's ''Meno'' | ||
=== Motte and Bailey Doctrine === | |||
* or the "Motte and Bailey fallacy" | * or the "Motte and Bailey fallacy" | ||
* a fallacy of exaggeration in which an argument is presented with absurd exaggerations ("the Motte") and if objected to is replaced by an undoubtedly true but hardly controversial statement ("the Bailey", which is then used to advance the original exaggerated claim | * a fallacy of exaggeration in which an argument is presented with absurd exaggerations ("the Motte") and if objected to is replaced by an undoubtedly true but hardly controversial statement ("the Bailey", which is then used to advance the original exaggerated claim | ||