Page 1 of 1

Fallacies & Critical Thinking - the Nizkor Project

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:44 am
by slow_dazzle
There are some good articles on CT floating around on the net, and other bits of the web, like THIS ONE

In order to understand what a fallacy is, one must understand what an argument is. Very briefly, an argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).

There are two main types of arguments: deductive and inductive. A deductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) complete support for the conclusion. An inductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) some degree of support (but less than complete support) for the conclusion. If the premises actually provide the required degree of support for the conclusion, then the argument is a good one. A good deductive argument is known as a valid argument and is such that if all its premises are true, then its conclusion must be true. If all the argument is valid and actually has all true premises, then it is known as a sound argument. If it is invalid or has one or more false premises, it will be unsound. A good inductive argument is known as a strong (or "cogent") inductive argument. It is such that if the premises are true, the conclusion is likely to be true.

A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. A deductive fallacy is a deductive argument that is invalid (it is such that it could have all true premises and still have a false conclusion). An inductive fallacy is less formal than a deductive fallacy. They are simply "arguments" which appear to be inductive arguments, but the premises do not provided enough support for the conclusion. In such cases, even if the premises were true, the conclusion would not be more likely to be true.

Re: Fallacies & Critical Thinking - the Nizkor Project

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:31 am
by sansmerci
slow_dazzle wrote:There are some good articles on CT floating around on the net, and other bits of the web, like THIS ONE


Yes, slow dazzle, and super tutorials, too, such as

Mission: Critical
http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/main.html

OpenCourseWare on critical thinking, logic, and creativity
http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/

Argument and Critical Thinking Tutorials
http://www.humboldt.edu/~act/HTML/

The Philosophy Pages
http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/index.htm

Fallacy Files
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/index.html

Guide to Philosophy on the Internet -Pete Suber (No longer updated)
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/philinks.htm