Viewpoints are something like assumptions, opinions, and evaluations. It can be consciously or unconsciously assumed. Unconscious viewpoints include the egocentric, ethnocentric, religiocentric, andocentric, and anthropocentric. We communicate we know our viewpoint and can understand and respect the viewpoints of others as well.
Writers shape their stories through their choice of a point of view. Their choices include third-person, first-person, and multiple points of view. These viewpoints may be omniscient or humanly limited. U.S. politics cannot be defined in terms of simple left-to-right spectrum of viewpoints. In alternative periodicals and on the internet a far wider range of viewpoints is available than on U.S. network television and mainstream publications.
Chapter 9: Argument
Argument is an active endeavor that requires involvement, interaction with questions, and evaluation.
The questions asked in the critical reading of arguments are:
1) What viewpoint is the source of this argument?
2) What is the issue of controversy?
3) Is it an argument or a report?
4) What are the argument’s strengths and weaknesses?
The analysis of arguments in terms of their reasons and conclusions applies to both inductive and deductive arguments. Reasons include data, evidence, while conclusions include hypotheses.
The conclusion is the last step in a reasoning process. Although, it may stated at any time during an argument.
Reasons Support conclusions. They may be generalizations that could function as conclusion in another context.
An issue is a selected aspect of topic of controversy upon which positions may be taken either pro or con. Issues are stated in neutral terms often beginning with the word should and ending with a question.
Questions guidelines for analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of arguments:
· Are the reasons adequate to support the conclusion?
· Are there any hidden assumptions?
· Are any central words ambiguous or slanted so as to incite prejudice?
· Are there fallacies of reasoning?
· Is any important information missing?
Chapter 10: Fallacies
1. Word ambiguity uses undefined and vague words in an argument, seeking to gain an advantage by using words that could be interpreted in more than one way.
2. Misleading euphemism are words that hide meaning by wrapping a less acceptable idea in positive or neutral connotations.
3. Prejudicial language persuades through the use of loaded words that convey a bias while pretending to convey objective information.
4. Appeals to fear and pity seek to persuade through affecting emotions rather than through sound rational support for an argument.
5. Appeal to false authority seeks to influence others by citing phony or inappropriate authorities. This false authority might be a person, a tradition, or conventional wisdom.
6. Person attack refuses another argument by attacking the opponent rather than addressing the argument itself. This fallacy can take form of using abusive language or name-calling.
7. Poisoning the well seek to prejudice others against a person, group, or idea and prevent their positions from being heard. This technique seeks to remove the neutrality necessary for listening and to implant prejudice instead.
8. The red herring is a ploy of distraction. It makes a claim, and then instead of following through with support, it minimizes the issue or attention into irrelevant issues.
9. Pointing to another wrong are also called two wrongs make a right. It says,” Don’t look at me; he did it too!”
10. Circular reasoning is the assertion or repeated assertion of a conclusion as though the conclusion were a reason.
Chapter 11: Inductive Reasoning and Inductive Fallacies
1. Hasty generalization is the fallacy of basing a conclusion on insufficient evidence.
2. The either fallacy, or false dilemma, is an argument that oversimplifies a situation, asserting that there are only two choices, when actually other alternatives exist.
3. The questionable statistic is the statistic that is either unknowable or unsound.
4. Inconsistency in evidence is the fallacy of offering evidence that contradicts the conclusion.
5. The false analogy is a comparison of two things that have some similarities but also significant differences that are ignored for the sake of the argument.
6. False cause is the fallacy of claiming there is a causal connection between events without reasonable evidence to support the claim.
7. The slippery slope is the fallacy of claiming without sufficient proof that permitting one event to occur would lead to a chain reaction that could be stopped.
Chapter 12: Deductive Reasoning
1. Deductive reasoning is the process of starting with one or more statements called premises and investigating what conclusions necessarily follow from these premises.
2. Deduction is the subject of formal logic, whose main concern is with creating forms that demonstrate reasoning.
3. Logic has its own technical vocabulary, for example, argument, claim, hidden premise or conclusion, hypothesis, syllogism, valid, propositions.
4. The standardized language of syllogisms allows a reduction of everyday language into verbal equations.
5. Deductive and inductive reasoning are not isolated pursuits but are mentally interwoven both in major and mundane problem solving.
6. It is possible to infer the rules of valid and invalid reasoning from the study of models.
