Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Question

Want to see more full solutions like this?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Want to see more full solutions like this?

Subscribe now to access step-by-step solutions to millions of textbook problems written by subject matter experts!

Students have asked these similar questions

What are the PROs and CONs of the Guardian Mindset basd on mindsets in policing by Mike D'Antonio in a TEDx Talks presentation?

Discuss one example of each of these… A time that someone gave you legitimate criticism that you could learn from. A time that someone gave unfair criticism which you should not be hurt by. A time that you criticized someone, perhaps accurately, but you delivered your criticism so harshly that the other person could not take it in. How could you have said it better?

prepare a written response which compares and contrast Zimbardo’s Theory of Individuation with Social Identity Theory.

Answer 2

Question

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Want to see more full solutions like this?

Subscribe now to access step-by-step solutions to millions of textbook problems written by subject matter experts!

Answer 3

Question

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Want to see more full solutions like this?

Subscribe now to access step-by-step solutions to millions of textbook problems written by subject matter experts!

Answer 4

Question

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Want to see more full solutions like this?

Subscribe now to access step-by-step solutions to millions of textbook problems written by subject matter experts!

Answer 5

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Answer 6

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Answer 7

Chapter 1, Problem 1RQE

Summary Introduction

Introduction:

Common errors include inaccurate observations, overgeneralization, selective observation, and illogical reasoning. Inaccurate observations are common among non-scientists who are often only observing casually rather than with a purpose, and so miss many details. Others overgeneralize by using a small sampling to make assertions about whole groups. Biases can be supported through selective observation, by which one could avoid addressing issues one wants to avoid. Illogical reasoning is possible in combination with any of the previous errors as it deals with how conclusions are made. Sometimes, the information is accurate, but the reasoning about it is not, and this results in false conclusions. The website Infowars is based on illogical reasoning it uses to create and spread conspiracy theories. A scientist would avoid this site by focusing on trustworthy sources instead.

Answer 8

Expert Solution & Answer

Explanation of Solution

Answer and explanation:

(This question requires a subjective response, and this is an example.) As humans we are prone to errors of inquiry, especially when used in non-scientific situations. Casual observation, as used by most people, is open to inaccuracy and selective bias. A pundit trying to support a conspiracy theory may, for example, selectively choose to observe phenomena as evidence to support his or her theory. The same pundit may miss things, consciously or unconsciously, that may challenge the theory. The same person may also use overgeneralization to further their point, for example, citing one failed government program as evidence that the government is always incompetent. Many conspiracy theories are based on illogical reasoning because they require a large number of coincidences to have happened on purpose, and a host of co-conspirators focus in on the plan. An article claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the solar, wind, and geothermal energy industries is an example of a large, wide-ranging conspiracy theory supported by illogical reasoning. A scientist would avoid these errors by sticking to the scientific method as much as possible, and looking for evidence and support from academically sound sources.

Answer 9

Expert Solution & Answer

Answer 10

Expert Solution & Answer

Answer 11

Ch. 1 - Prob. 1RQE Ch. 1 - Prob. 2RQE Ch. 1 - Prob. 3RQE

Explanation of Solution

Want to see more full solutions like this?

Chapter 1 Solutions