After reading this chapter, I would notice myself making some of these common mistakes. I think that when we speak commonly or when we write casually, sometimes it is easy to bypass these mistakes especially when we are using a more conversational tone.
Here are the 5 common mistakes discussed in the chapter:
*Arguing backwards - this can happen when someone uses the conclusion before the premises. Its kind of like giving the punchline before saying the actual joke and it makes less sense.
*Confusing Possibility with Plausibility - Something that is possible is not necessarily plausible. There needs to be substantial evidence to prove a point.
*Bad appeal to authority - This one is tricky. If the claim is not coming from the authority, than it is less credible and can be misleading because there is an uncertainty for the crediblity of the source it is coming from.
*Mistaking the person for the claim - Just because someone says that a claim is true, doesn't mean it is true. Again, there is an uncertainty about the credibility of the person who is providing the information because you don't know if it is coming from a legitimate source or if it coming from backstage gossip.
*Mistaking the person for the argument - On the flip side, an argument should not be rejcted just because of the person who is saying it. For example, I should not disregeard the claim my friend might be making just because we had a squabble earlier and I refuse to be her friend.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I found this section of the book interesting as well. I would have agree that these are really common mistakes. A lot of people tend to make these mistakes when evaluating premises. I myself do. I found this concept interesting because it helps readers know what to avoid to not make mistakes when evaluating a premise. The book provides 5 common mistakes that people usually make and by doing so it helps people like you and me to know what to look out for when evaluating premises. The examples of each of the 5 the book provided made it easy to understand as well.
I definitely agree with everything you said in your post. I found the way you explained the different mistakes very simply stated and easy to understand. I also realized that I have recently found myself making some of these mistakes. For instance, I am constantly arguing backwards with people and do not understand why they do not see what I see out of the argument. Another mistake I am constantly making is mistaking the person for the claim and mistaking the person for the argument. I am a very trusting person with people that I know and very skeptical of those that I do not know very well. I realize that I am constantly believing or not believing those that I do or do not know and trust.
I liked your example about how people state certain opinions and others assume that they are always true. Mistaking one for a claim happens many times with a higher authority. Because of that higher authority, one trust’s their ability to be always, if not, mostly right all the time. It’s true, like you stated that the claim will seem not as true if not from a person of authority. This happens a lot in my line of work. As an instructor to smaller kids, they will always listen to what I say because I am the person in charge. If one child says to another to do something, they will always try to find me to see if it is true or not.
Post a Comment