Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
PSY130 Fall '11 MidT
Midterm flashcards for C.Killian PSY130
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Three criteria for evaluating the strength of an argument | 1. Acceptable and consistent premises 2. Premises are relevant to and support the conclusion 3. Important missing components have been considered. |
| Fallacy: Association effects | Two events occur closely together in time/space and is associated as being like the other. |
| Fallacy: False cause | Two events occur closely together in time/space and one is thought to cause the other. |
| Fallacy: Appeals to pride/snobbery | The use of flattery to get what you want. |
| Fallacy: Arguments against the person | The representatives of a cause are used to belittle the cause itself (focus is taken off the real issue). |
| Fallacy: Put-downs | Name-calling (focus is taken off the real issue) |
| Fallacy: Appeals to pity | Substituting a sympathetic claim as evidence. |
| Fallacy: Appeals to popularity | Bandwagon; appeal to conformity/laziness. |
| Fallacy: Testimonials | Taking a person's word for granted because they are an average person, an expert, or famous (more persuasive power) |
| Fallacy: Appeals to authority | Taking an "expert" or "professional" for granted (doesn't have to be present or to be actually presenting a message) |
| Fallacy: False dichotomy | Absolutes (vs shades of grey): it's this or that. |
| Fallacy: Card-stacking/suppressed info | Emphasis on the positive and less on the negative (important missing information). |
| Fallacy: Circular reasoning | A premise that restates the conclusion. |
| Fallacy: Irrelevant reasons | The premise does not support the conclusion. |
| Fallacy: Slippery slope (continuum) | One expects an issue to grow bigger and worse. |
| Fallacy: Straw person | Changing an opposing view into a weaker form. |
| Fallacy: Part-Whole | Making direct comparisons between the parts and the whole (individuals vs groups). |
| Fallacy: Weak and/or inappropriate analogies | Making a comparison between two very distinct things (fatal disease vs a cold) |
| Fallacy: Incomplete comparisons | Judging an item with no comparison (better, the best, more) |
| Fallacy: Knowing the unknowable | Assuming with no basis of experience or knowledge. |
| Fallacy: Appeals to ignorance | Absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence. |
| Fallacy: Appeals to tradition | Always sticking to one's comfort zone/the way things have always have gone. |
| Ruggiero: Three misconceptions about critical thinkers | 1. Reason to support belief (generalize experience)≠ critical thinker 2. Imitation ≠ critical thinker 3. Critical thinking can't be learned. |
| Ruggiero: Four steps to becoming an individual | 1. First reaction = tentative, wait for more evidence. 2. Why that reaction? Borrowed from someone else? 3. Alternate reaction/situation? 4. Different reaction = different outcome? |
| Ruggiero: Seven characteristics of critical thinkers | 1. Honesty of knowledge & searches for the answer. 2. Problems=challenges to overcome 3. Willing to understand complex issues 4. Updated evidence-based judgement 5. Open-minded to other's beliefs 6. Balanced view (no absolutes) 7. Thinks before acti |
Created by:
michelledoan93
Popular Psychology sets