Philosophy and Fallacies | Learn to Support Arguments

1. PHILOSOPHY AND FALLACIES 4 4.1 Philosophy 4.2Fallacies and Reasoning

2. 4.1PHILOSOPHY GOALS Learnhow to support arguments using both pragmatic examples and philosophical reasoning. Understand the branches of moral philosophy and the characteristics of each.

3. TERMS • pragmatic example • philosophy • metaethics • divine command theory • moral relativism • egoism • altruism

4. normative ethics • consequentialist theory • ethical egoism • ethical altruism • utilitarianism • duty theory • categorical imperative • social contract • applied ethics

6. Supporting Arguments • All arguments must be supported or they will not hold up during the round. • Pragmatic examples • Examples that are practical

7. What is Philosophy? • Philosophy • The investigation of nature, causes, and principles of reality, knowledge, or values based on logical reasoning. • The foundation of philosophy lies n the art of investigating, examining, or arguing.

8. Purpose of Philosophy • Philosophy has few right or wrong answers. • Some arguments are considered either better or worse than others. • Some arguments can help you support your debate case when backed by • Philosophical reasoning • Practical examples

9. A Guide to Studying Philosophy • Read, Reread, and Read Again • Find the Message • Apply the Knowledge to Everyday Situations

10. Branches of Moral Philosophy • Ideas of famous philosophers remain relevant even with the passage of time. • Aristotle • Plato • Thomas Hobbes • Immanuel Kant • Philosophy used in debates deals with • Morals • Ethics

11. Metaethics • Metaethics • Explores two ideas • What ethical principles mean • How to determine good from bad • The origin of ethical principles • Ethics as eternal truths that can exist without humans • Ethics exist only because humans have created them

12. Divine command theory • Believes than an all-powerful Supreme Being or God wills things and that they become reality • God wills ethics as commands • Moral relativism • Humans invented moral values • Individuals create their own moral standards • Morality comes from the entire society

13. Egoism • Your actions are prompted by selfish desires • Altruism • The instinct to show kindness to others

14. Moral ethics may be based on either • Emotions or • Reason

15. Normative Ethics • Normative ethics • Moral standards that tell you what is right and wrong behavior

16. Consequentialist theories • The result of an outcome determines the morality of an act • An action is morally correct if the favorable consequences of the action outweigh the unfavorable consequences

17. Ethical egoism • An action is morally right if its consequences are more favorable than unfavorable only to the person performing the action • Ethical altruism • An action is morally right if its consequences are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone except the person performing the action • Utilitarianism • An action is morally right if its consequences are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone

18. Duty Theories • Duty theories • Morality is based on basic duties or obligations and other’s rights • Duties to God • Duties to oneself • Duties to others

19. John Locke believed one should not harm anyone else’s natural rights. • Categorical imperative • Moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality • Social contract • A real or hypothesized agreement between a citizen and his or her society • Social contracts are used in debate to determine how people should act.

20. Virtue Theories • Virtue theories examine good habits of character that you should acquire. • Virtues fall inside the range of two vices.

22. Applied Ethics • Applied ethics • Deals with controversial issues specific to a certain issue of study • Applied ethical issues must be • Controversial • A moral issue

24. 4.2FALLACIES AND REASONING GOALS Recognizearguments that use logical versus illogical reasoning. Distinguish different types of fallacies and recognize their use.

25. TERMS • logical reasoning • inductive argument • deductive argument • premise • inference • conclusion • fallacy

27. Logical Reasoning • Logical reasoning • Statements that have been formed from sound thinking and proof of reasoning

28. Inductive and Deductive Arguments • Inductive arguments • Give specific facts that lead to a conclusion or generalization • Based on observations or experiences • Deductive arguments • Begin with a general rule that is accepted as truth • Based on laws, rules or accepted principles • You can often express the same argument using either method.

30. Parts of an Argument • Premise • The statement that sets up the argument • Fact or assumed fact • Inference • A statement concluded from the premise(s) • Conclusion • The final inference

31. Recognizing Fallacies • Fallacy • Either a false statement or an argument that is based on unclear or erroneous reasoning • Fallacies can affect the way a judge interprets arguments in a debate. • Avoid using fallacies.

32. Examples of Fallacies • Ad Hominem • Latin for “against the man” • Attacks the speaker • Appeal to Authority • Questioning that a person is qualified to make a statement or is an authority in a particular area

33. Appeal to Tradition • Because something has been done a certain way for a very long time, it should continue in the same manner • Begging the Question • Occurs when conclusion of the argument is presented as a premise of the argument

34. Bifurcation • Gives an “either or” premise with no options between the two extremes • Confusing Cause and Effect • Incorrectly assumes that one thing is the result of something else

35. Composition • Concludes with no justification that a property or characteristic of a part is shared by a whole • Dicto Simpliciter • Stereotyping or sweeping generalization • Occurs when a general rule is incorrectly applied to a specific topic

36. Hasty Generalizations • Drawing a conclusion when there is not enough evidence to support it • Non Sequitur • When one line of reasoning does not follow another

37. Poisoning the Well • A preemptive attempt to discredit a person by making claims, which may be true or false, against him • Post Hoc ergo Proctor Hoc • When something happens before an event and is then assumed to be the cause of the event

38. Red Herring • When information is introduced into an argument that is irrelevant to what is being said • Purpose is to distract attention from the real points • Slippery Slope • Assumes that because one event has happened another event is inevitable

39. Straw Man • Occurs when a position that has been introduced is ignored • An inaccurate version of what has been said is introduced and attacked • Recognize the “traps” set for you by your opponent. • Eliminate fallacies from your arguments.