unit 1 Exercise (1.1-1.7)

docx

School

Humber College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

OPERATING

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by CoachBravery5867

Exercise 1.1 1. What is critical thinking?  Critical thinking involves actively and objectively analyzing information, concepts, situations, or problems in order to make well-informed decisions or conclusions. 2. Is critical thinking primarily concerned with what you think or how you think?  Critical thinking is primarily concerned with how you think. It focuses on the process of thinking, evaluating, and reasoning rather than just the content of what you think. 3. Why is critical thinking systematic?  Critical thinking is systematic because it follows a structured and organized approach to problem-solving. It involves logical reasoning and a methodical evaluation of evidence and arguments. 4. According to the text, what does it mean to say that critical thinking is done according to rational standards?  Critical thinking done according to rational standards means that it adheres to principles of reason, logic, and evidence. It involves making judgments based on sound and objective reasoning. 5. According to the text, how does a lack of critical thinking cause a loss of personal freedom?  A lack of critical thinking can lead to accepting beliefs or decisions without proper examination. This uncritical acceptance may result in the loss of personal freedom because individuals may be influenced or controlled by unsupported or irrational ideas. 6. What does the term critical refer to in critical thinking?  The term "critical" in critical thinking refers to the ability to analyze, evaluate, and assess information objectively, without bias, and with a focus on logical reasoning. 7. How does logic differ from critical thinking?

 Logic is a component of critical thinking. Critical thinking involves the broader process of analyzing and evaluating information, while logic specifically deals with the principles of valid reasoning. 8. What is a statement?  A statement is a declarative sentence that can be either true or false. It expresses a fact, opinion, or information. 9. What is an explanation?  An explanation is a statement or set of statements that clarify or provide reasons for a particular event, phenomenon, or conclusion. 10.According to the text, by what standard should we always proportion our acceptance of a statement?  We should proportion our acceptance of a statement according to the evidence and rational reasoning provided. 11.What is an argument?  An argument is a set of statements where one statement (the conclusion) is supported by one or more other statements (the premises). 12.Give an example of an argument with two premises.  Argument: All humans are mortal (premise 1). Socrates is a human (premise 2). Therefore, Socrates is mortal (conclusion). 13.What is the function of a premise?  The function of a premise is to provide support or evidence for the conclusion in an argument. 14.What is a conclusion?

 The conclusion is the main point or claim in an argument, and it is the statement that the premises are intended to support. 15.Why can’t a mere assertion or statement of beliefs constitute an argument?  Mere assertions or statements of beliefs lack the structured support and evidence required in an argument. An argument needs premises that logically support a conclusion. 16.True or false: All disagreements contain an argument.  False. Disagreements may involve differences in opinions, beliefs, or preferences without necessarily having a structured argument. 17.Does the following passage contain an argument? Sample passage: I couldn’t disagree more with Olivia. She says that video games provoke young men to violence and other insensitive acts. But that’s just not true.  Yes, the passage contains an argument. The conclusion is that Olivia's statement about video games causing violence is not true, and the premises would be the reasons or evidence supporting this conclusion. 18.Does the following passage contain an argument? Sample passage: Alonzo asserts that the government should be able to arrest and imprison anyone if they are suspected of terrorist acts. But that’s ridiculous. Doing that would be a violation of basic civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.  Yes, the passage contains an argument. The conclusion is that Alonzo's assertion is ridiculous, and the premises provide reasons or evidence supporting this conclusion. 19.What are indicator words?  Indicator words are words or phrases that signal the presence of an argument or identify key parts of an argument, such as premises or conclusions. 20.List three conclusion indicator words.  Therefore, thus, hence.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

21.List three premise indicator words.  Since, because, for. 22.Give an example of a short argument that uses one or more indicator words.  Argument: (Premise) Since it's raining outside, (Conclusion) I should take an umbrella. Exercise 1.2 For each of the following sentences, indicate whether it is or is not a statement. 1. Now that you’re mayor of the city, do you still believe that the city government is a waste of time? (Not a statement - it's a question) 2. Do not allow your emotions to distort your thinking. (Statement) 3. If someone wants to burn the American flag, they should be able to do it without interference from the police. (Statement) 4. Do you think that I’m guilty? (Not a statement - it's a question) 5. Should our religious beliefs be guided by reason, emotion, or faith? (Statement) 6. Stop driving on the left side of the road! (Not a statement - it's a command) 7. The Vietnam War was a terrible mistake. (Statement) 8. The Vietnam War was not a terrible mistake. (Statement) 9. I shall do my best to do my duty to God and my country. (Statement) 10.Are you doing your best for God and country? (Not a statement - it's a question)

Exercise 1.3 For each of the following passages indicate whether it constitutes an argument. For each argument specify what the conclusion is 1. René hates Julia, and she always upsets him, so he should avoid her. (Argument: Conclusion - René should avoid Julia) 2. Do you think the upcoming election will change anything? (Not an argument - it's a question) 3. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. (Not an argument - it's an expression of allegiance) 4. Why do you think you have the right to park your car anywhere you please? (Not an argument - it's a question) 5. Wait just a minute. Where do you think you’re going? (Not an argument - it's a command) 6. If you smoke that cigarette in here, I will leave the room. (Argument: Conclusion - If you smoke, I will leave the room) 7. The Titanic sank, and no one came to save it. (Not an argument - it's a statement of events) 8. Jesus loves me, for the Bible tells me so. (Not an argument - it's a statement of belief) 9. Spiderman is a better superhero than Superman because kryptonite can’t hurt him, and he doesn’t have a Lois Lane around to mess things up. (Argument: Conclusion - Spiderman is a better superhero than Superman) 10."Whether our argument concerns public affairs or some other subject, we must know some, if not all, of the facts about the subject on which we are to speak and argue. Otherwise, we can have no materials out of which to construct arguments." [Aristotle, Rhetoric] (Argument: Conclusion - We must know some, if not all, of the facts to construct arguments) 11.If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. Don’t outlaw guns. (Argument: Conclusion - Don't outlaw guns)

12.If someone says something that offends me, I should have the right to stop that kind of speech. After all, words can assault people just as weapons can. (Argument: Conclusion - I should have the right to stop offensive speech) 13."Citizens who so value their ‘independence’ that they will not enroll in a political party are really forfeiting independence, because they abandon a share in decision-making at the primary level: the choice of the candidate." [Bruce L. Felknor, Dirty Politics] (Argument: Conclusion - Citizens forfeit independence by not enrolling in a political party) 14.If someone says something that offends me, I cannot and should not try to stop them from speaking. After all, in America, speech—even offensive speech—is protected. (Argument: Conclusion - I should not try to stop offensive speech) 15."Piercing car alarms have disturbed my walks, café meals, or my sleep at least once during every day I have lived in the city; roughly 3,650 car alarms. Once, only once, was the wail a response to theft. . . . Silent car alarms connect immediately to a security company, while the noisy ones are a problem, not a solution. They should be banned, finally." [Letter to the editor, New York Times] (Argument: Conclusion - Noisy car alarms should be banned) 16."If history is a gauge, the U.S. government cannot be trusted when it comes to sending our children to war. It seems that many years after Congress sends our children to war, we find out that the basic premise for the war was an intentional lie." [Letter to the editor, L.A. Daily News] (Argument: Conclusion - The U.S. government cannot be trusted when sending children to war) Exercise 1.4 For each of the following passages indicate whether it constitutes an argument. For each argument specify both the conclusion and the premises 1. Faster-than-light travel is not possible. It would violate a law of nature. Argument:  Conclusion: Faster-than-light travel is not possible.  Premise: It would violate a law of nature.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

2. You have neglected your duty on several occasions, and you have been absent from work too many times. Therefore, you are not fit to serve in your current capacity. Argument:  Conclusion: You are not fit to serve in your current capacity.  Premises: You have neglected your duty on several occasions. You have been absent from work too many times. 3. Racial profiling is not an issue for white people, but it is an issue for African Americans. Argument:  Conclusion: Racial profiling is an issue for African Americans.  Premise: Racial profiling is not an issue for white people. 4. The flu epidemic on the East Coast is real. Government health officials say so. And I personally have read at least a dozen news stories that characterize the situation as a “flu epidemic.” Argument:  Conclusion: The flu epidemic on the East Coast is real.  Premises: Government health officials say so, I personally have read at least a dozen news stories that characterize the situation as a "flu epidemic." 5. The terrorist group ISIS in Syria and Iraq has killed thousands of innocent citizens. They are nothing more than fanatic murderers. Argument:  Conclusion: The terrorist group ISIS is nothing more than fanatic murderers.  Premise: The terrorist group ISIS in Syria and Iraq has killed thousands of innocent citizens. 6. “Current-day Christians use violence to spread their right-to-life message. These Christians, often referred to as the religious right, are well known for violent demonstrations against Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics. Doctors and other personnel are threatened with death, clinics have

been bombed, there have even been cases of doctors being murdered.” [Letter to the editor, Arizona Daily Wildcat] Argument:  Conclusion: Current-day Christians use violence to spread their right-to-life message.  Premises: These Christians, often referred to as the religious right, are well known for violent demonstrations against Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics. , Doctors and other personnel are threatened with death, clinics have been bombed, there have even been cases of doctors being murdered. Exercise 1.5 For each of the following conclusions, write at least two premises that can support it. Your proposed premises can be entirely imaginary. To concoct the premises, think of what kind of statement (if true) would convince you to believe the conclusion. EXAMPLE: Conclusion: Pet psychics can diagnose a dog’s heartburn 100 percent of the time. Premise 1: In the past fifty years, in hundreds of scientific tests, pet psychics were able to correctly diagnose heartburn in dogs 100 percent of the time. Premise 2: Scientists have confirmed the existence of energy waves that can carry information about the health of animals. 1. Conclusion: What this country needs is more family values.  Imaginary Premise 1: Societies with strong family values experience lower crime rates.  Imaginary Premise 2: Countries that prioritize family values tend to have more stable economies. 2. Conclusion: All animals—rodents, dogs, apes, whatever—have moral rights, just as people do.  Imaginary Premise 1: Scientific studies show that animals exhibit behaviors indicative of moral considerations.

 Imaginary Premise 2: Societies that recognize and protect animal rights demonstrate increased empathy and compassion. 3. Conclusion: Every woman has the right to abort her fetus if she so chooses.  Imaginary Premise 1: Legal systems based on individual rights support a woman's autonomy over her body.  Imaginary Premise 2: Access to safe and legal abortion services is crucial for women's reproductive health. 4. Conclusion: When I looked into your eyes, time stood still.  Imaginary Premise 1: Intense emotional experiences, like love, can alter one's perception of time.  Imaginary Premise 2: Psychologists argue that strong emotional connections can create a sense of time distortion. 5. Conclusion: Repent! The end is near.  Imaginary Premise 1: Interpretations of ancient prophecies align with current global events.  Imaginary Premise 2: Various cultures and religions have historical records predicting an imminent end. Exercise 1.6 For each of the following sets of premises, write a conclusion that would be supported by the premises (your conclusion should depend on both premises). Neither the conclusion nor the premises need to be statements that are true. To formulate an appropriate conclusion, try to think of a statement (conclusion) that could reasonably be supported by the premises. EXAMPLE: Premise 1: The price of your shares in the stock market will continue to decline for at least a year. Premise 2: Anyone with shares whose price will continue to decline for at least a year should sell now. Conclusion: You should sell now.  Premise 1: You are afraid of heights.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

 Premise 2: Anyone who is afraid of heights will fall if he or she climbs a tree.  Conclusion: You should avoid climbing trees due to your fear of heights.  Premise 1: School vouchers are being used in thirteen states and the District of Columbia.  Premise 2: School vouchers have decreased the quality of education in every state where they’ve been used.  Conclusion: The use of school vouchers negatively impacts the quality of education in states and the District of Columbia.  Premise 1: School vouchers are being used in thirteen states and the District of Columbia.  Premise 2: School vouchers have improved the quality of education in every state where they’ve been used.  Conclusion: The use of school vouchers positively contributes to the quality of education in states and the District of Columbia.  Premise 1: All married people are happier than unmarried people.  Premise 2: You are married.  Conclusion: You should be happier than unmarried people.  Premise 1: If stem-cell research is banned, Edgar will be very happy.  Premise 2: Stem-cell research is banned.  Conclusion: Edgar is very happy because stem-cell research is banned. Exercise 1.7 For each of the following passages, determine if there is an argument present. If so, identify the premises and the conclusion. “[T]he Religious Right is not ‘pro-family.’ . . . Concerned parents realize that children are curious about how their bodies work and need accurate, age- appropriate information about the human reproductive system. Yet, thanks to Religious Right pressure, many public schools have replaced sex education with fear-based ‘abstinence only’ programs that insult young people’s intelligence and give them virtually no useful information.” [Rob Boston, Free Inquiry Magazine]  Argument: Yes  Premises:

 Concerned parents realize that children need accurate, age-appropriate information about the human reproductive system.  Many public schools have replaced sex education with fear-based 'abstinence only' programs.  Conclusion: The Religious Right is not 'pro-family.' “[Francis Bacon] is the father of experimental philosophy. . . . In a word, there was not a man who had any idea of experimental philosophy before Chancellor Bacon; and of an infinity of experiments which have been made since his time, there is hardly a single one which has not been pointed out in his book. He had even made a good number of them himself.” [Voltaire, On Bacon and Newton]  Argument: Yes  Premises:  Francis Bacon is the father of experimental philosophy.  No one had any idea of experimental philosophy before Chancellor Bacon.  An infinity of experiments since Bacon's time has been pointed out in his book.  Bacon had made a good number of experiments himself.  Conclusion: Francis Bacon is the father of experimental philosophy. “Is there archaeological evidence for the [Biblical] Flood? If a universal Flood occurred between five and six thousand years ago, killing all humans except the eight on board the Ark, it would be abundantly clear in the archaeological record. Human history would be marked by an absolute break. We would see the devastation wrought by the catastrophe in terms of the destroyed physical remains of pre-Flood human settlements. . . . Unfortunately for the Flood enthusiasts, the destruction of all but eight of the world’s people left no mark on the archaeology of human cultural evolution.” [Kenneth L. Feder, Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries]  Argument: Yes  Premises:  If a universal Flood occurred, it would be abundantly clear in the archaeological record.  Human history would be marked by an absolute break if a universal Flood occurred.  The devastation of the catastrophe would be visible in the destroyed physical remains of pre-Flood human settlements.  The destruction of all but eight people left no mark on the archaeology of human cultural evolution.  Conclusion: There is no archaeological evidence for the Biblical Flood.

unit 1 Exercise (1.1-1.7)

Related Documents