This is a graded discussion: 25 points possible due Aug 3 at 1:59am

Week 4 Discussion: Distinguishing Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

57 57

Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Click on the following tabs to review the concepts that will be addressed in this activity:

The Basic Structure of Deductive and Inductive Arguments Click on the following links to view argument examples:

Link: Deductive Argument Example

Link: Inductive Argument

Initial Post Instructions For the initial post, address the following:

Textbook: Chapter 8, 9, 17 (Introduction) Lesson Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)

Find and post examples of deductive and inductive arguments. For each example, evaluate its logical strength, using the concepts and ideas presented in the textbook readings, the lesson, and any other source you find that helps you to evaluate the validity (deductive) or strength (inductive) of the argument. You can use examples from the text, or you can find examples elsewhere.

Editorials and opinion columns are a good source, as are letters to the editor. Blogs will also often be based on arguments.

A valid structure is the way in which an argument is put together that assures it will pass the test of logical strength.

Valid Argument Structures Deductive Inductive

!

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 1 of 48

Search entries or author

” Reply

Follow-Up Post Instructions Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification. Do you agree with their analysis – be very specific about why you agree or disagree.

Writing Requirements

Grading This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:

Course Outcomes (CO): 3, 4

Due Date for Initial Post: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday Due Date for Follow-Up Posts: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday

Is it inductive or deductive? Explain why. Does it pass the tests of validity and strength? Explain.

Use mapping and evaluative techniques to make sure it is an argument.

Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up) Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source) APA format for in-text citations and list of references

Link (webpage): Discussion Guidelines

Unread # $ % Subscribe

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Jun 22, 2020

!

Greetings Students:

You are only required to post an initial answer post and ONE follow-up post in each required discussion, each week.

Please make your TWO posts each week between Monday and Sunday. Your posts must occur on different days with the first post occurring by Wednesday. If there are extenuating circumstances, please communicate with your professor.

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 2 of 48

Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jun 22 at 12:39pm

” Reply &

When determining whether an argument is inductive or deductive, you must assume that all premises are true. Then you must see whether the conclusion would probably or necessarily follow. You are not determining whether the premises are true but judging the kind of reasoning based on the argument’s structure. In other words, you “deduce”.

Example Inductive:

In 2010, an oil drilling rig leased by British Petroleum (BP) was damaged from an explosion, and oil began gushing out of a broken pipe into the Gulf of Mexico. In the six months after the accident, more than 600 sea turtles have been found dead along the Gulf Coast. Since this is a much higher amount than what is typical for the season, it is reasonable to conclude that the sea turtle deaths are a result of the oil spill.

The issue is whether the 600 sea turtle deaths are caused by the 2010 British Petroleum oil spill. The conclusion is that the 600 sea turtle deaths are caused by the 2010 British Petroleum oil spill. The first premise is that in 600 sea turtles have been found dead along the Gulf Coast within six months of the 2010 British Petroleum oil spill. The second premise is that 600 dead sea turtles is a much higher amount than what is typical for the season. This is inductive.

Example Deductive:

Why wouldn’t a woman consider herself a feminist? Even my husband calls himself a feminist. If he can call himself that, then every woman should be able to call herself that. Every woman should consider herself a feminist.

The issue is whether every woman should consider herself a feminist. The implied conclusion is that every woman should consider herself a feminist. The first premise is that my husband calls himself a feminist. The second premise is that if my husband considers himself a feminist, then every woman should consider herself a feminist. This is a deductive argument.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Tuesday

!

Students,

Check out this video on Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 3 of 48

” Reply &

It seems your browser is blocking 3rd party session cookies which are required for the Kaltura application. To resolve this issue, please update your settings to allow 3rd party cookies.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Tuesday

!

FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS PLEASE!!

Editorials and opinion columns are a good source, as are letters to the editor. Blogs will also often be based on arguments.

Use mapping and evaluative techniques to make sure it is an argument.

Is it inductive or deductive? Explain why.

Does it pass the tests of validity and strength? Explain.

In other words,DO NOT go to a website and provide an argument that has already informed of the type of argument that it is.

For example if you went to this type of website (https://examples.yourdictionary.com/deductive-reasoning-examples.html (https://examples.yourdictionary.com/deductive-reasoning-examples.html) ) you would find the following:

Deductive Reasoning Examples – DO NOT GO

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 4 of 48

” Reply &

HERE!

Instead, go to Op Ed (NY Times and others) or Letters to the Editor or a Blog based on an argument for your post where “YOU” have to determine the type of argument it is.

Prof. Sheffield

Inductive Reasoning: My mother is Irish. She has blond hair. Therefore, everyone from Ireland has blond hair. Deductive Reasoning: My mother is Irish. Everyone from Ireland has blond hair. Therefore, my mother has blond hair.

Inductive Reasoning: Most of our snowstorms come from the north. It’s starting to snow. This snowstorm must be coming from the north. Deductive Reasoning: All of our snowstorms come from the north. It’s starting to snow. Therefore, the storm is coming from the north.

Inductive Reasoning: Maximilian is a shelter dog. He is happy. All shelter dogs are happy. Deductive Reasoning: Maximillian is a shelter dog. All shelter dogs are happy. Therefore, he is happy.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682)

Ashley White (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682) Tuesday

!

Hi Professor and Class!

First example:

It’s sunny in Singapore. If it’s sunny in Singapore, then he won’t be carrying an umbrella. So, he won’t be carrying an umbrella(Fieser, 2018).

This example is a deductive argument. It has logical strength because it’s sunny so he won’t be carrying an umbrella. Both premises are valid to the conclusion that comes after “So”. It passes the test of validity because it’s sunny in Singapore and if it’s sunny he won’t be carrying an umbrella provide support for the conclusion.

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 5 of 48

” Reply &

Second example:

Every time I’ve walked by that dog, it hasn’t tried to bite me. So, the next time I walk by that dog it won’t try to bite me(Fieser,2018).

This example is an Inductive argument. Its strength depends on its premises. For example, the argument would be stronger the more times the person walked by the dog and didn’t get bit. Its logic to think the dog has never tried to bite him, so he won’t next time. The argument could get stronger or weaker if certain circumstances changed in the premises. Inductive arguments can change based off of different evidence and deductive arguments don’t.

References

Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.

Fieser, J. (2018). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved July 28, 2020, from https://iep.utm.edu/ded-ind/

rd

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682)

Ashley White (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682) Tuesday

” Reply &

!

Hi Professor,

I’ll give it another shot!

This example from the book I believe is deductive because it has two true premises and then a true conclusion. Everyone who owns a car needs car insurance is premises 1 and Joe just purchased a car is the 2nd premises. Conclusion would be he needs insurance.

EX: Everyone who owns a car needs car insurance. Joe just purchased a car. Therefore Joe needs car insurance.

I think the example below is an example of an Inductive argument because just like the one above the argument could get weaker or stronger if things changed in the premises.

EX: The cat scratches me everytime I walk by it. Tomorrow when I walk by the cat will scratch me.

References

Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.rd

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 6 of 48

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Yesterday

” Reply &

!

Hello Ashley, thank for your repost.

Remember, when identifying premises the first premise is premise (without the s); the same for the second.

The first argument is positively deductive. The second argument is inductive since there is a good chance that that cat will probably scratch when you walk by since it has occurred so many times in the past.

We are learning that there are two crucial thinking skills. In the first, inductive reasoning, one observes a set of facts from several viewpoints. Leaving out some facts or adding new ones might lead to some particular interpretation. Inductive reasoning helps to make a generalized conclusion based on individual reflections or datasets. For example, the observation, “this tree has a shadow” is an individual observation. The generalized conclusion that “all trees have shadows” helps us approach some specific problems and derive an answer.

In deductive reasoning, you go the other way around. You start at some general premise. This could be anything from mathematical physics such as “the sum of the internal angles of a quadrilateral is 360°. This is the way critical thinking works. You find out how to solve the questions with the help of your teammates. Here again one needs to check opinions based on your assessment of the situation. Also, if you study the assumptions that led to the situation, you might discover a lot of fallacy.

Determine if the following are inductive or deductive:

1. If God exists there is good in the world. God exists, so there is good in the world. 2. Many inexplicable phenomena have eventually been explained by science, so

consciousness will eventually have a scientific explanation. 3. Since every action has an equal and opposite reaction, this action will have an equal and

opposite reaction. 4. Which of the two argument types (i.e. deductive or inductive) seem to add something new

to the premises? Which seems to have its conclusion contained within its premises?

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)

Britney Parkerton (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709) Tuesday

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 7 of 48

” Reply &

!

Hello Professor Sheffield and class,

Inductive Example

“The sun rose yesterday, the day before yesterday, the day before the day before yesterday, and 1,000,000 days before that. Therefore, the sun will rise tomorrow” (Johnson, 2016, pg.5).

The issue is that the sun will rise tomorrow. The claim is that the sun will rise tomorrow. The premise is that the sun rose yesterday, the day before yesterday, the day before the day before yesterday, and 1,000,000 days before that. According to Facione (2016), “We use inductive reasoning skills when we draw inferences about what we think is probably true” (pg. 176). This is inductive reasoning because it is probable that the sun will rise tomorrow, but it is not for certain.

Deductive Example

“All muscles are made out of living tissue. All humans have muscles. Therefore, all humans are made out of living tissue” (Wilson, 2016).

In our textbook Facione (2016) discusses how we use deductive reasoning to “assume truth of a set of beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (pg. 156).This is an example of a deductive argument. The conclusion is that all humans are made from living tissue. The first premise is all muscles are made from living tissue. The second is that all humans have muscles, and therefore all humans are made from living tissue. If we assume that the two premises are true, then the claim is true as well.

Reference

Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically (3 Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.

Johnson, G.S. (2016) Argument and Inference. An Introduction to Inductive Logic. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books? hl=en&lr=&id=8yDYDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%22inductive+argument%22+examples&ots= 5BL7lsSIYM&sig=gVifJeZWiI_MqWtcuzSTYRV11iw#v=onepage&q=%22inductive%20argument%22% 20examples&f=false (https://books.google.com/books? hl=en&lr=&id=8yDYDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%22inductive+argument%22+examples&ots=5BL7lsSIYM&s ig=gVifJeZWiI_MqWtcuzSTYRV11iw#v=onepage&q=%22inductive%20argument%22%20examples&f=false)

Wilson, R. (2016). Deductive and Inductive Reasoning. Retrieved from https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf (https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf)

rd

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 8 of 48

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)

Britney Parkerton (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709) Yesterday

!

Hello Professor Sheffield and class,

Here are examples of inductive and deductive reasoning from opinion articles. I apologize for misunderstanding the instructions.

Inductive Example

“The economy isn’t driven by stock prices or corporate profits — it only works because of workers. If they’re doing well, the economy is doing well” (Linden, 2020).

The claim is that if workers are doing well, the economy is doing well. The first premise is that the economy isn’t driven by stock prices or corporate profits. The second is that the economy only works because of workers. According to Facione (2016), “We use inductive reasoning skills when we draw inferences about what we think is probably true” (pg. 176). This is inductive reasoning because it is it is probably true that the economy is driven by workers, and not the stock prices or corporate profits, however, it is not for certain. This argument would need more solid evidence to prove that the claim is true. I do not believe this argument has a strong validity.

Deductive Example

“Amazon is making a killing from this crisis. Almost literally. Jeff Bezos’s net worth has grown by more than $24 billion (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/amazon-jeff-bezos-gains-24bn- coronavirus-pandemic) since the crisis started since everyone is at home trying to avoid going to the store and ordering everything online” (Cummings, 2020).

The is that Amazon is making a killing from this crisis. The first premise is that Jeff Benzo’s net worth has grown by more than $24 billion since the crisis started. The second premise is that everyone is at home trying to avoid going to the store and ordering everything online. In our textbook Facione (2016) discusses how we use deductive reasoning to, “assume truth of a set of beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (pg. 156). This is deductive reasoning because if it is true that Jeff Benzo’s net worth has grown more than $24 billion since the crisis, and everybody is ordering everything online, then Amazon is most definitely making a killing from the crisis. I do believe this argument has strong validity. The author provided us with the amount of money Benzo’s next worth has grown since this crisis started, and it is highly probable that a lot of people are avoiding the stores right now to avoid contracting COVID-19.

Reference

Cummings, R. (2020, May 5). Working at Amazon was Always Painful. Now it’s Terrifying. Buzzfeed News. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rinacummings/amazon-warehouse- was-grinding-me-down-then-coronavirus

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 9 of 48

” Reply &

(https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rinacummings/amazon-warehouse-was-grinding-me-down-then- coronavirus)

Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically (3 Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.

Linden, Michael. (2020, April 10). Opinion: When People Can’t Work, You See What The Economy Really Is. Buzzfeed News. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/michaellinden/coronavirus-shows-us-workers-are-the- economy (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/michaellinden/coronavirus-shows-us-workers-are-the- economy)

rd

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Yesterday

!

Brittney, thank you for reposting. And no worries. These days most of us have so much to think about.

The first argument is absolutely inductive; the second deductive. I know for sure about the second one since I have Amazon stock and it is going up (YAY).

Can you see the different ways the premises support the conclusion in the following arguments?

Deductive All philosophers have a brain. Bob is a philosopher. Therefore, Bob has a brain.

Inductive Most philosophers have a brain. Sam is a philosopher. So, Sam probably has a brain.

This distinction describes how the premises support the conclusion. In deductive arguments, the truth of the premise(s) guarantees the conclusion. That is, it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if we assume the premises are true in a good/valid deductive argument.

In inductive arguments, the premise(s) provide probabilistic support. That is, it is improbable, but possible, that the conclusion is false in good/strong inductive arguments.

Argument 1 is a deductive argument because the conclusion must follow if we assume the premises are true. In example 1, it is impossible for the conclusion (i.e. Bob has a brain) to be false if the premises are assumed true. So, it is a valid deductive argument.

In Argument 2, it’s improbable that the conclusion is false if we assume the premises are true.

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 10 of 48

” Reply &

It’s possible, but unlikely, that Sam doesn’t have a brain.

Identify the following arguments as inductive or deductive

1. In my experience, most people are happier when they have the Epicurean goods of friends, self-sufficiency, and time for reflection. Therefore, I think you will probably be happier if you focus on getting these three goods.

2. You cannot achieve peace of mind until you recognize what is under your control and what isn’t under your control, and then not worry about what isn’t under your control. What others think of you isn’t ultimately under your control precisely because it’s their thinking. Therefore, don’t worry about what others think of you (Stoicism).

3. All tigers are animals. Tigger is a tiger. Therefore, Tigger is an animal. 4. Humans usually use new technologies in times of war to destroy instead of build. The

atomic bomb is a great example. Therefore, we will probably use strong artificial intelligence to destroy in times of war (if we ever invent it).

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)

Britney Parkerton (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709) 5:23pm

!

Hello Professor Sheffield,

Argument 1:

The claim is that if you focus on the three goods listed that you will probably be happier. The premise is that most people are happier when they have the Epicurean goods of friends, self- sufficiency, and time for reflection. I would say this argument is inductive because it is probable that having goods like friends, self-sufficiency, and time of reflection would make a person happier, therefore, if we assume that the probability that the premises are true, then the conclusion is most likely true as well, but it is not certain.

Argument 2:

The claim is that you should not worry about others think of you. The first premise is that you cannot achieve peace until you recognize what is under your control, and what isn’t under your control, and then not worry about what isn’t under your control. The second premise is that what others think of you isn’t ultimately under your control precisely because it’s their thinking. I believe this example is deductive reasoning. This is because if we assume that the two

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 11 of 48

” Reply &

premises are in fact true, then the claim that you shouldn’t worry about what others think of you is true as well.

Argument 3:

This argument is deductive reasoning. The claim is that Tigger is an animal. The first premise is that all tigers are animals. The second is that Tigger is a tiger. If both premises are true, then that would make the claim true as well.

Argument 4:

The claim is that we will probably use strong artificial intelligence to destroy in times of war (if we ever invent it). The first premise is that humans usually use new technologies in times of war to destroy instead of build. The second is that the atomic bomb is a great example. This is an inductive argument because the premises are probably true, but it is not certain that if we do invent strong artificial intelligence, we would use it to destroy in times of war.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/143371)

Chloe Williams (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/143371) Tuesday

!

Chloe Williams

Week 4 Discussion

Inductive Argument:

We are currently under going a pandemic in today’s world because of the Coronavirus. I know that you guys are very familiar with this. This virus has caused many different hardships challenges around the world, including people being out of work. When the U.S. hit an all time high in the number of cases of the virus, it was discovered that over 40 million Americans have filed for unemployment (Cohen, 2020). Since the unemployment cases have never been that high, it is reasonable to conclude that those cases are a result from the high rise of Coronavirus cases.

The issue is whether the 40+ million unemployment cases are causes behind the high number in the Coronavirus cases. The conclusion is that the 40+ million unemployment cases are caused by the high rise of Coronavirus cases. The first premise is that there was over 40 million Americans filing for unemployment once America was hit hard with the Coronavirus. The second premise is that 40+ million unemployment cases is extremely high and is not normal on a regular basis. This is inductive.

Deductive Argument:

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 12 of 48

” Reply &

Why doesn’t everyone from Louisiana know how to cook Gumbo? I’m only 23 and even I know the ingredients and instructions to a good Gumbo dish. Louisiana is known for it’s Southern Creole foods, especially Gumbo. If I can cook gumbo and creole foods, everyone that was born and raised in Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo and other popular creole foods.

The issue is whether everyone from Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo and other creole foods. The implied conclusion is that everyone from Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo and other creole foods. The first premise is that I’m only 23 and knows how to cook Gumbo. The second premise is that if I can cook Gumbo, everybody else that’s from Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo as well. This is a deductive argument.

References

Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.

Cohen, Patricia. 2020. Still Catching Up: Jobless Numbers May Not Tell Full Story. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/business/economy/coronavirus- unemployment-claims.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/business/economy/coronavirus- unemployment-claims.html)

rd

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Yesterday

” Reply &

!

Chloe, thank you for your post for this week and providing examples of both deductive and inductive arguments. Also, thank you for providing a story from the New York Times.

I would absolutely agree that the first argument on COVID-19 is probably true but not necessarily and, as a result, makes it inductive. The second argument (I like the argument very much!), is deductive. As an aside is it strong or valid?

Identify the following arguments as inductive or deductive:

1. We are going to have at least one day in which the temperature rises above 100 in Austin because this has happened in Austin for at least the last 300 years.

2. Consciousness is either a physical thing or a nonphysical thing. Since it is not a physical thing, it must be nonphysical.

3. Since the universe is like a watch, it is probably designed. 4. There are only two people in this house: Blaise and Catherine. Neither wear glasses.

Therefore, Blaise doesn’t wear glasses.

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 13 of 48

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138071)

Danin Sibert (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138071) Tuesday

!

Hello class,

My first example is a letter to the editor of the Washington Post titled, Maryland’s online option for receiving mail-in ballots could overwhelm election workers. In this letter, Gina M. Angiola explained the issues that may arise in Maryland come election time. Her argument was essentially that:

Online ballots have to be hand copied by election officials. Last year it took Montgomery County 5 days to count their ballots. This year there will be more mail in ballots than last year (because of COVID). We are only allowed 10 days to count all votes. So only the citizens that are in rural areas and have no other option but online voting should be able to place online votes.

I labeled this argument as inductive. It is inductive because although the facts stated were noteworthy, there could be different factors that could change the conclusion. Facione and Gittens (2016) explain, “As long as there is the possibility, however remote, that a highly probable conclusion might be mistaken even though the evidence at hand is unchanged, the reasoning is inductive” (p 176). Due to COVID, the government might hire more election officials to process the online ballots therefore making it beneficial for more citizens to participate in online voting. Since I was able to find a counterexample I do not feel that the argument is valid.

My second example I found was an op-ed on USA Today. Paul Rosenzweig argued why William Barr is an unethical lawyer. One of the articles arguments was that:

William Barr is an attorney general. All lawyers are bound to follow the ethical rules adopted by the State Bar Association where they are licensed to practice law. Barr has been dishonest and deceitful, and has also interfered with the administration of justice. Therefore, Barr’s license to practice law should be revoked.

I labeled this as deductive. This is deductive because all three premises rely on each other and it is a logical argument. “Deductive reasoning moves with exacting precision from the assumed truth of a set of beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (p 159). Assuming that all the premises were true, the conclusion followed accordingly and the argument was valid.

Angiola, G. M. (2020, July 28). Opinion | Maryland’s online option for receiving mail-in ballots could overwhelm election workers. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/marylands-online-option-for- receiving-mail-in-ballots-could-overwhelm-election-workers/2020/07/28/1939d6b8-d020-11ea-826b-

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 14 of 48

” Reply &

cc394d824e35_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/marylands-online- option-for-receiving-mail-in-ballots-could-overwhelm-election-workers/2020/07/28/1939d6b8-d020-11ea-826b- cc394d824e35_story.html)

Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3rd. Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.

Rosenzweig, P. (2020, July 28). The unethical William Barr: 27 lawyers, 4 powerful allegations of dishonesty and deceit. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/28/william-barr-unethical-deceitful-attorney- general-column/5517466002/ (https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/28/william-barr-unethical- deceitful-attorney-general-column/5517466002/)

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891)Sonja Sheffield (Instructor) Yesterday

!

Danin, thank you for posting for this week and providing arguments from the Washington Post editorial.

Yes, I can go with the first argument being inductive some people living in Maryland should “probably” submit an online ballot. The second argument.

So many students what is the purpose of logic? Well let’s think about for a moment since a branch of philosophy )critical thinking) is a form of logic.

Logic is a tool for discovering the truth and why things are connected through lines of inference. These lines of inference allow us to make determinations on truth and falsehood, validity and invalidity, and much more. Most arguments are composed of two important parts: premises and conclusions which delineate deductive and inductive arguments.

It is often best that students do a formal analysis (determining premise(s) & conclusion) for arguments since it not only reinforces argument analysis skills but also provides the best means for correctly identifying fallacies.

Determine the type of fallacies for the following: Indicate the issue first and then premise(s) and conclusion followed by the type of fallacy.

#1 Smoking is harmful to your health. Smoking is bad for you.

#2 Smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases.

#3 There is no reason why you should not buy a life insurance policy. You should buy a life insurance policy.

#4 No plan is in place to ensure that all troops are safe from sexual assault. Women should not try to

7/30/20, 8:14 PM Page 15 of 48

” Reply &

enter the military at this time.

Reference

Cengage Learning: Critical Thinking eText.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/118358)

Monica Hernandez (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/118358) Yesterday