Lexical Definitions

Inform us about what most people intend when they use a term.

Disambigous Definitions

Definitions offered to avoid ambiguity or equivocation.

Ambiguity of a phrase or sentence because grammar admits of multiple interpretations.

1) Distinguish possible meanings of the term.

2) Restate the arument using the various meanings.

3) Determine wether any resulting arguments are good.

Definitions stipulated for the purpose of an argument of discussion.

Definitions offered with the aim of
systematizing a body of knowledge and using the most
efficient systems of definitions.

E.g., x is the sister of y if and only if x is not male and the sibling of y.

Definitions that proceed by
ostending (e.g., pointing towards) something.

E.g., What’s a chair? I don’t know how to define it,
actually. But they’re that kind of thing. *points to chair*

Tu quoque arguments take issue with what we might
naturally think of as hypocrisy, but are still fallacious
when used to challenge the truth of claims.

They are ad hominem fallacies since the fact that a
claim is true of someone does not mean it is not also
true of another.

Ambiguous -> Unclear which meaning is used.

Vague -> Cannot associate a precise meaning.

Directed against the person who makes a claim or an argument rather than an argument or claim itself.

Common fallacy of relevance.

Four Questions About Testimony

(Appeals to Authority)

1) Is the cited authority in fact an authority in the
appropriate area?

2)Is the kind of question that can now be settled by
expert consensus?

3)Has the authority been cited correctly?

4)Can the cited authority be trusted to tell the truth?

Appeal to Popular Opinion

(Ad Populum Fallacy)

When the fact that a claim is widely accepted is taken to be relevant to whether or not a claim is true.

(Not relevant for moral issues and scientific issues)

Appeals to Pity

(Ad Misercordium Fallacy)

Draws our focus to the poor state of someone or something's life and arguing that we ought to believe something or do something based on our pity for the person or thing in question.

(effective because our emotions often determine what we want to believe)

If and only if one of the premises that is used directly or indirectly to support a conclusion is equivalent to the conclusion itself.

Ex:    1) OJ did it.

                       2) Therefore, OJ did it.

When an argument fails to provide independent reasons for their conclusion AND when the reasons or rationale for the premises are just that one accepts the conclusion.

Assumes the truth of the conclusion and cannot provide independent support for believing the conclusion.

Arguments or positions constructed in such a way that no evidence can possibly refute them.

The proper response is to ask for cases where it provides informative predictions.

Vacuity Definition

(Also give 3 cases)

Distorting the Structure of an Argument

1) Circular Reasoning

2) Begging the Question

3) Self-Sealers

To reason that the probability of a certain outcome based on the previous events.

Cruical Mistakes: The belief that probabilistic events and their probablities are connected.

When we try to figure out the probabilities of an event, we reason using the cases we are most familiar with.

This often distorts our judgements about probability.