When the author reads the conditional supplied in the premise incorrectly .
- the author read the conditional chain backwards without negating
- the author negated the premise chain and read straight through
Bad conditional reasoning
- the author read the conditional chain backwards without negating
- the author negated the premise chain and read straight through
Bad conditional reasoning
when the author see that two things are correlated and concludes that one of those things is causing the other
Bad causal reasoning
1. When the author says a member of a category has a property.
2. when the author concludes that the category itself also has that property
Whole - to - Part & Part - to - Whole
1. When an author says a category has a property
2. When an author concluded that a member of that category also has that property
Whole - to - Part & Part - to - Whole
1. When the author talks about something having a property
2. When the author concluded that a bunch of other things also have that property.
overgeneralization
When you have something small in the stimulus (hot temperature) and turn it into something big (temperatures in general).
- To _____ you take a premise about hot temperatures and collude about temperatures in general
overgeneralization
1. When there is a survey
2. The author concludes things based on the survery
3. There are all kinds of silent things wrong with the survey (biased sample/question, small sample size, survey lairs, other contradictory surveys )
Survey Problems
Research always assumes that the two groups are same in all respects except the ones called out as part of the study
false starts
1. There's a study with two people
2. Crazy researchers assumes the two groups are the same in all respects except those pointed out as part of the study
3. Crazy researchers concludes that the difference in the study results are due to the one key difference the study is focusing on
False Start
Tells people what they believe
Implication
1. Person has a belief
2. Author mentions a factual implication of that belief
3. Author claims that the person believes the implication of the belief
Implication
Pretends there are only tow options when there could be more .
1. Limiting a spectrum
2. Limiting options
False Dichotomy
1. Crazy person outlines two possible options (this step is absent when limiting a spectrum)
2. Crazy person eliminates one of the options
3. Crazy person concludes the second option must be the case