Entry 4: Argument Structures and Fallacies
Item 1 [1]
John and Bill are discussing the
possibility of a strike at their factory. John says, "I'm certain that Jim
Powers will join the strikers." Bill wonders how he can be so sure that Powers,
a thirty-year employee and a foreman respected by both labor and management,
will go on strike.
John explains: "In the past
twenty-five years, there have been several strikes at the factory, some before
it become a union shop. In each strike, all union members went on strike. Jim
Powers, though a friend of management, is a union member. Thus, union members
will strike and Jim Powers will strike with the others."
All union members will strike (All S
are P)
Jim Powers is a union member (a is
S)
__________________________________________
Therefore, Jim Powers will strike.
(therefore, a is P)
=> valid argument HOWEVER it is
unsound because one of the premises "all union members will strike"
is not correct, in other words, its truth value is not reliable.
This argument should be revised as
follows:
Almost all union members will strike
Jim Powers is a union member
__________________________________________
Therefore, Jim Powers will properly
strike.
Item 2 [2]
"Everyone I've met this morning
is going to vote for the incumbent. The incumbent is going to win."
"How many people did you
meet?"
"Three"
à Content fallacies (Hasty generalization)
Because the conclusion based on too
few people.Item 3 [3]
"Now, only two things can be
done with the savings and loan places. You either shut them down now or let
them go bankrupt."
à Fallacies of presumption (false
dilemma)
There are some solutions else such as paying in instalments, leaving something as security and assigning property.Reference:
[2] Retrieved from: http://prezi.com/_fdyzlp0lhev/argumentation/
Nhận xét này đã bị tác giả xóa.
Trả lờiXóadear my friend
Trả lờiXóai think you should analysize your item 2 clearly
the person only met three poeple who is going to vote for incumbent but he claim that the incumbent will win. this conclusion is base on few people
contetn fallacy: hasty generalization
I would like to add the fallacy "Appeal to popularity" to item 2. The first person say that: "Everyone I've met this morning is going to vote for the incumbent => The incumbent is going to win."
Trả lờiXóaI have the same opinion as Hanh,in item 2, it is both Hasty generalization and Appeal to popularity.
Trả lờiXóaIn the final entry, I think you should write source instead of reference. Reference # source.
Item 1:
Trả lờiXóaJohn starts his argument from the event "In the past twenty-five years, there have been several strikes at the factory, some before it become a union shop. In each strike, all union members went on strike", so the structure of this argument should be:
In the past, all union members went on strike whenever there was one
The situation in the past is correct in present time and in future as well
If there is a strike in the future, all union members will go on strike
There will be a strike in the future
Power is a union member
________________________________________________________
Power will certainly attend that strike.
The argument is valid because if all the premises are true, then the conclusion is true. However, it contains a fallacy of relevance because the situation in the past and that in present time and future are of no relevance. Specifically, it is a kind of appeal to tradition.