entry 4- Pham Thi Thanh Tuyen

CRITICAL THINKING

(Argument errors)

Entry 4- 10e14: Pham Thi Thanh Tuyen

1. ITEM 1:

Bill: "I don't think it is a good idea to cut social programs."
Jill: "Why not?"
Bill: "Well, many people do not get a fair start in life and hence need some help. After all, some people have wealthy parents and have it fairly easy. Others are born into poverty and..."
Jill: "You just say that stuff because you have a soft heart and an equally soft head."

Fallacy of structure:

  Structure of this argument is that:

         Some people have wealthy parents and have it fairly easy

         Others are born into poverty and (need nothing)

(Social program is for those who really need help)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion: cut social programs

=> This is an invalid weak argument

–Fallacy of content:  personal attack

http://www.pinoyloveforum.com/index.php?topic=6629.15

II. ITEM 2:

 1, Structure Fallacies 
Some A are B

Some B are C

-------------------------------------

Therefore, some A are C

 2, Content fallacy:  (Fallacies of presumption)

Analyze:

Penguins (A) are black and white (B)

Some old TV shows (C) are black and white (B)

Therefore, some penguins (A) are old TV shows (C)

–> Invalid weak argument and invalid conclusion.

http://jazzroc.wordpress.com/tag/truth/

III. ITEM 3

       Father to daughter: Either you buy a large car and watch it guzzle away your paycheck, or you buy a small car and take a greater risk of being injured or killed in the event of an accident.

 Content fallacy:  False dilemma
Analysis:

      Father just gave his daughter only two choices without considering other ones. He showed out that one of two outcomes is inevitable, and both have negative consequences. In fact, apart from the two above, the daughter can go on foot or other means of transportation such as buses which are also safe.

Source: http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#cliche