Lorem Ipsum Dolor

Inductive Reasoning and Fallacies

Chapter 9 p. 165

Inductive Reasoning

❖ From Specific Instances to General Conclusion

❖ Never certainty, always only probability

❖ The greater the probability, the more likely it is we can act on our conclusion

❖ P. 166: Case scenario

Evaluating Generalizations

❖ A generalization is a conclusion based on data gathered of specific instances. See page 167 and evaluate the reliability of these generalizations:

❖ People over the age of 60 tend to prefer to listen to oldies

❖ 73 percent of hotel rooms in this city are infested with bedbugs

❖ It's probably going to be cloudy and cold in San Francisco if you go in August

Four Questions for Evaluating Inductive Claims

❖ Was the correct group sampled?

❖ Were the data obtained in an effective way?

❖ Were enough cases considered?

❖ Was the sample representative?

❖ See page 168: Explain the meaning of each of these questions

"Correlation is not Causation"

❖ What is the meaning of:

❖ Coincidence

❖ Correlation

❖ Causation

Coincidence

❖ Two events happen together by chance

❖ Being struck twice by lightning

❖ By coincidence, every man in the room was named Fred.

❖ “I'm going to Boston this weekend.” “What a coincidence! I am too.”

❖ It was no coincidence that he quit his job at the bank a day after the robbery.

❖ Every person in this room is a third son.

Correlation

❖ Two events or characteristics that are usually found together, but one does not necessarily cause the other.

❖ "Correlation does not equal causation"

❖ Southerners and grit-eating.

❖ Dying one's hair and being a woman.

❖ Rise in food stamps and Barack Obama becoming president.

❖ Students who sit in the front of the class and students who make As.

Correlations

❖ Does eating more make you fat -OR- does being fat make you eat more?

❖ Are active people lean because they are active? -OR- Are lean people active because they are lean

❖ Gary Taubes, Why We Get Fat: And What to do About It: Two groups of mice had ovarectomies; both became obese. One group ate as much as they wanted (too much); the other group was put on a diet. Both remained obese, though the group on the diet became more sedentary.

More Correlation

❖ Most people who get lung cancer are or have been smokers.

❖ But most smokers do not get lung cancer.

❖ What causes lung cancer?

Causal Relationships❖ One event (or characteristic) causes another: are

the following causal relationships?

❖ Driving 120 miles an hour and accidents.

❖ Jumping off a 20 story building and death.

❖ Tectonic plates shifting and earthquakes.

❖ Car emissions and climate change.

❖ Marijuana and apathy

❖ Being raised in single parent families and failure

Inductive Fallacies

❖ Erroneous (Hasty) Generalization (p. 172)

❖ Playing with Numbers (p. 172-173)

❖ False Dilemma (Either/Or) (p. 173)

❖ The Gambler's Fallacy (p. 173)

❖ The False Cause Fallacy (p. 174)

❖ The Slippery Slope Fallacy (p. 175)

Evaluate Arguments p. 177

❖ Identify the argument/fallacy in Questions 1-17