Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Claims are constantly being made, many of which are confusing, ambiguous, too general to be of value, exaggerated, unfalsifiable, and suggest a dichotomy when no such dichotomy exists. Good critical thinking requires a thorough understanding of the claim before attempting to determine its veracity. Good communication requires the ability to make clear, precise, explicit claims, or “strong” claims. The rules of reason in this book provide the framework for obtaining this understanding and ability.
This book / online course is about the the eleven rules of reason for making and evaluating claims. Each covered in detail in the book.
|
Appeal to consequences applies when you argue that the truth/falsity of a statement is based on the consequences it would have. E.g. "My grandmother cannot be dying from cancer, because it would break up the family." "I'm certain to win the lottery, because it would help my wife and I pay off the mortgage on our house." It's basically a non sequitur in the sense that a statement's truth value is determined based on whether it has positive or negative consequences, when that is actually irrelevant to whether it is true or not. It doesn't apply to moral judgements (e.g. "we should restrict free speech because if we do not, we risk a far-right resurgence") because we are not affirming/denying truth (descriptive), we are suggesting behaviour (prescriptive). This is a mere unsupported claim, possibly an opinion. |
answered on Sunday, Jun 13, 2021 08:53:14 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|