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.
|
I would think that most people fight laws they fully don't understand. Because of motivated reasoning, they don't want to fully understand. This is an example of poor reasoning. However, it is problematic for a governing body to enact a law and not give reason for it, rather just say "go away and think." That is like saying a good reason exists, but you are just not smart enough to understand/see it. Kind of like claiming that Jesus/Allah/Krishna, etc. exists, but only if you have to have enough faith to experience him. Or that I am the best-looking guy in the world, but you need to have really good taste in human aesthetics to see it. This can be classified as a form of a Self-Sealing Argument , since no evidence can be brought against it. |
answered on Thursday, Sep 03, 2015 12:30:22 PM by Bo Bennett, PhD | |
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|