CH_PHIL347_Week 4_Journal_N
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Chamberlain University College of Nursing *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
10866
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by ChiefThunder4088
1
Week 4: Journal CH_PHIL347_WK2_Journal
2
In considering the concepts of valid and warranted inference, it's apparent that they align closely with deductive and inductive reasoning, respectively. The lexical definitions of "valid" and "warranted" provide a foundation for understanding their connotations in the context of reasoning. "Valid" typically denotes something logical and well-founded, suggesting a sense of certainty. In deductive reasoning, a valid inference means that the ending necessarily pursues from the inferences, leaving no room for doubt. Conversely, "warranted" implies justification or support, often suggesting a degree of probability rather than certainty. In inductive reasoning, a warranted inference indicates that the conclusion is supported by available evidence and is considered the most probable given the circumstances, though not guaranteed. Therefore, while deductive arguments aim to prove conclusions with certainty, inductive arguments seek to prove the findings as the most likely explanation based on available evidence.
Moving on to fallacies are erroneous arguments that appear valid but are based on faulty reasoning. For instance, consider the fallacy of denying the antecedent, which emerges when one
asserts that if the antecedent of conditional information is false, the resulting must also be false. This fallacy is revealed by analyzing the valid argument template affirming the consequent. In this template, if the resultant is affirmed, it does not necessarily mean that the antecedent is true. Similarly, denying the antecedent does not logically entail the falsity of the consequent, as there could be other factors at play. Thus, by understanding the structure of the valid argument template, one can identify the fallacy when the premise-conclusion relationship is improperly applied.
Regarding the bonus exercise on analyzing the 2009 healthcare public option debate, while it would require time and effort, it would be well spent. This exercise offers an opportunity
to apply critical thinking skills to a significant societal issue that affects countless individuals.
3
Understanding the complexities and implications of healthcare policy is crucial for making informed decisions impacting individuals and communities. Moreover, completing such an exercise enables one to evaluate arguments objectively, regardless of personal opinions, and assess their validity and strength. Similarly, dedicating time and effort to research and analyze other issues of societal importance, such as healthcare disparities, would also be worthwhile. Healthcare is undeniably vital, and comprehensive understanding can lead to positive changes that benefit society.
As a critical thinker, citizens should be informed on issues and existing problems. Being informed empowers people to partake in democratic processes, advocate for their interests, and hold policymakers accountable. With an informed populace, there is a risk of unfair policies being enacted, and the potential for positive change is maintained. Therefore, staying informed is
a responsibility and a fundamental aspect of civic engagement and democracy.
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
4
References: Facione, P.A., &Gittens (2016). Think critically (3rd ed.) Boston: Pearson