How Logical Fallacy Invalidates Any Argument

Fallacies are defects that cause an argument to be invalid, unsound, or weak. Logical fallacies can be separated into two general groups: formal and informal. A formal fallacy is a defect which can be identified merely by looking at the logical structure of an argument, rather than at any specific statements. Informal fallacies are defects which can be identified only through an analysis of the actual content of the argument. Formal Fallacies Formal fallacies are found only in deductive arguments with identifiable forms. One of the things which makes them appear reasonable is the fact that they look like and mimic valid logical arguments, but are in fact invalid. Here is an example: Premise: All humans are mammals.Premise: All cats are mammals.Conclusion: All humans are cats. Both premises in this argument are true, but the conclusion is false. The defect is a formal fallacy, and can be demonstrated by reducing the argument to its bare structure: All A are CAll B are CAll A are B It does not matter what A, B, and C stand for. We could replace them with wines, milk, and beverages. The argument would still be invalid for the exact same reason. It can be helpful to reduce an argument to its structure and ignore content in order to see if it is valid. Informal Fallacies Informal fallacies are defects which can be identified only through an analysis of the actual content of the argument, rather than through its structure. Here is an example: Premise: Geological events produce rock.Premise: Rock is a type of music.Conclusion: Geological events produce music. The premises in this argument are true but clearly, the conclusion is false. Is the defect a formal fallacy or an informal fallacy? To see if this is actually a formal fallacy, we have to break it down to its basic structure: A BB CA C This structure is valid. Therefore, the defect cannot be a formal fallacy and must instead be an informal fallacy that is identifiable from the content. When we examine the content, we find that a key term (rock) is being used with two different definitions. Informal fallacies can work in several ways. Some distract the reader from what is really going on. Some, like in the above example, make use of ambiguity to cause confusion. Defective Arguments There are many ways to categorize fallacies. Aristotle was the first to try to systematically describe and categorize them, identifying 13 fallacies divided into two groups. Since then,  many more have been described and the categorization has become more complicated. The categorization used here should prove useful, but it is not the only valid way of organizing fallacies. Fallacies of Grammatical Analogy Arguments with this defect have a structure that is grammatically close to arguments which are valid and make no fallacies. Because of this close similarity, a reader can be distracted into thinking that a bad argument is actually valid. Fallacies of Ambiguity With these fallacies, some sort of ambiguity is introduced either in the premises or in the conclusion itself. This way, an apparently false idea can be made to appear true so long as the reader does not notice the problematic definitions. Examples: Equivocation FallacyNo True Scotsman FallacyQuoting out of ContextFallacies of Relevance These fallacies all make use of premises which are logically irrelevant to the final conclusion. Examples: Ad HominemAppeals to AuthorityAppeals to Emotion and DesireFallacies of Presumption Logical fallacies of presumption arise because the premises already assume what they are supposed to prove. This is invalid because there is no point in trying to prove something you already assume to be true. No one who needs to have something proven to them will accept a premise which already assumes the truth of that idea. Examples: Begging the QuestionComplex QuestionFalse DilemmaFallacies of Weak Induction With this type of fallacy, there may be an apparent logical connection between the premises and the conclusion. However, if that connection is real, then it is too weak to support the conclusion. Examples: Ad Hoc RationalizationOversimplification Exaggeration Sources Barker, Stephen F. Elements of Logic. Hardcover — 1675, McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Curti, Gary N. Weblog. Fallacy Files, March 31, 2019.   Edwards, Paul (Editor). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Hardcover, 1st edition, Macmillan/Collier, 1972. Engel, S. Morris. With Good Reason: An Introduction to Informal Fallacies. Sixth Edition, Bedford/St. Martins, March 21, 2014. Hurley, Patrick J. A Concise Introduction to Logic. 12 Edition, Cengage Learning, January 1, 2014. Salmon, Merrilee H. Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking. 6th Edition, Cengage Learning, January 1, 2012. Vos Savant, Marilyn. The Power of Logical Thinking: Easy Lessons in the Art of Reasoning...and Hard Facts About Its Absence in Our Lives. Hardcover, 1st edition, St Martins Press, March 1, 1996.

A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1321 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2019/08/08 Category Literature Essay Level High school Tags: A Christmas Carol Essay Did you like this example? Bah Humbug! Yes you got it I am talking about the one and only Ebenezer Scrooge. Which means that this book report must be about the revolutionary story The Christmas Carol. Well you are right my fine fellow very right you are. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens" essay for you Create order We have all heard of Ebenezer Scrooge before. Grumpy old man who has lost all of his christmas spirit. And cares about nothing and none else then his money. Ah yes I know I know does not sound very merry or jolly right? Well thats just it! How does this story lead up to the Christmas cheer we all expect and desire for that my fine fellow you will just have to keep your ears and eyes open and continue reading! Oh goodie you have continued on this wondrous adventure with me! What better way to start off than with the very first chapter. The book starts off with a melancholy begging that is not expected from a story that has Christmas in the title. I am talking about death. The title of Stave 1 is â€Å"Marley’s Dead†. The first sentence was â€Å"Marley is dead: to begin with† â€Å" There no doubt whatever about that† To describe Marley and his death Scrooge used the very popular term â€Å"Old Marley was as dead as a doornail†. Little did poor old Scrooge know that he was gone in the site of the living people. But that really he was roaming around the earth serving all his so called sins that he did while still in life but not being able to go back and fix them. And very little did he know that on that very night he would be paid a visit by Marley’s spirit in itself. Marley’s intention was on the one night he had to be seen by those living once again was to warn Scrooge. About how life after death has been for him on the path that Scrooge himself is on. And last but definitely not least telling Scrooge he still has time to change and escape the future that he was not able to. He also comes to warn him about the 3 Spirits that would come to pay him a visit. Which were the ghost of Christmas past,present, and future. During Stave 1 the ghost of Christmas past played Scrooge a visit. He took Scrooge back to christmas as a child. And one of the most important events took him back to when his sister came to get him from school. In which he realized how bad of an uncle he had been to his nephew Fred. In stave two, Scrooge has already started to want to change his actions. He just has not done so yet. In stave 2 Scrooge is once again visited this time by the ghost of christmas present. The ghost would come to revile many thing of the christmas just a few days away. He was reviled to himself as always melancholy, anti social, and lonely. He also got to experience and see a part of the Cratchit Family he yet to know about. For example he had children. And not just one many. Then he got to meet the youngest of the Cratchits. Tiny Tim, Tiny Tim was the youngest in the family. And had a very serious illness. And was soon expected to die. He also got to see how his nephew’s Fred party would be without him. Once again he was starting to repeal from his prior actions. He got to once again see his family and how they would comment over â€Å"poor old Scrooge†. He also saw the charity worker he had formally rejected and what he was doing to help the people. He also got a cha nce to see the poor people he had earlier on wished death upon (â€Å" then they should die and decrease the surplus population†) and how they were trying to be happy with the little that they had. â€Å" But frankly hey rather die than live there† â€Å" We havent got much but with this it should do.† This shows how all people were just trying to make the best of what they had. And rappelling Scrooge’s actions therefore making him disappointed in himself and they had no idea about it what they were doing and how they were helping Scrooge in his change. In stave three the ghost of Christmas present continue his mission. Which is to show Scrooge what Christmas will be like in a couple of days. And to make him feel guilty. He has laid eyes upon all the poor folk and ask the ghost if they will please be spared. And the ghost hit him back with a taste of his own medicine using what Scrooge himself had said in stave one. Which was â€Å" then they should die and decrease the surplus population†. Those words hit Scrooge very strongly and changed his perspective of being and really made him feel bad about his prior statement. He now had wanted to apologize to all those poor folk who had been very insulted by his prior sayings he no longer knew what to do but hoped that when he once again opened his eyes and wake that he would be able to make up for all his wrong doings. In stave 4 we have started to come to and end. Or starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Scrooge awakens once more. And for the last time wakes up to another ghost awaiting him. In this case it was the ghost of Christmas yet to come. The ghost was not really a man of words as the other 2 had certainly been. He just did what was asked of him. Cut to the point and did not mingle whatsoever. He started off by showing Scrooge a dead body that resembles with extreme detail his bedroom and bed. Although he had not wanted to believe the possibilities of that dead body being him. Then the ghost tried to give poor Scrooge another hint with a couple of men standing outside a big what sounded to be office like building saying â€Å" well this funeral ought to be small for which I cant see anyone who would like to attend it†. He still did not want to catch on to the situation. The hint that really gave it away was his old maid stealing all his bed sheets, pillows, curtains et c. He really did not want to face the final straw that would make sure of it being him the body that now lay in the ground motionless. But cold hearted as always. He was brought his most unwanted place his tombstone! Which had said â€Å" Ebenezer Scrooge, Birth date February 7th, Death date December 25†! â€Å" NO NO this is not possible† he pleaded. He laid on his knees asking the ghost for mercy the ghost said nothing. In stave 5 we draw the final slab of the story. Instantly he woke up in happiness and woke up determined to be a better Scrooge. He started doing so by buying the Cratchits a turkey. He donated a lot to Charity. Helped out the poor. And most importantly. Helped save Tiny Tim . To who in Mr.Dickens words â€Å" Became like a second father.† To wrap everything up, I will give my general opinion over the book, ratings and recommendations. My personal opinion is that is turned out to be very nice book with a fantastic moral. And inspiring ways of writing. My Rating for this book grade wise is 7th grade and up. So the students will really be able to understand the message the story is trying to bring to its fellow readers. For age 12+ because once again the students will understand the moral much clearer. Would I recommend this book of course! I would do so because I think in can teach children maral, begins, love, and most of all hope.

Munich Agreement who was the winner Chamberlain or Hitler

Munich Agreement Assignment Who won at Munich, Hitler or Chamberlain? Neville Chamberlain was a realist, he had inherited a policy of appeasement Lord Halifax memoir) from his predecessor Baldwin. His prime motive during his diplomatic meetings with Adolf Hitler was to prevent Britain becoming entangled in a war that she was ill equipped to wage. This he successfully achieved and by defusing a situation through statesmanship he bought valuable time to allow the British forces to re-arm. On becoming Prime Minister in May 1937, Chamberlain’s government was still recovering from the depression. To add to this the empire was being threatened in the east by Japan, and there were many of her Members intent on the path of self†¦show more content†¦The French had signed an agreement with Czechoslovakia to support her in the event of hostilities in 1924, (Franco Czech Treaty).but Prime Minister Daladier visited London in April 28th 1938, although stating publically that â€Å"he had wanted a firm stand from Chamberlain over their support to the Czech government, but had actually been dissuaded by logistic pessimism!† However the day before, privately he had told an agent of the German embassy he hoped the British† would suggest pressure be put on Prague† allowing him to acquiesce. (Butler ra1971p68). Chamberlain had stated in a letter to king George vi (13th September 1938) an agreement was reached with the French supporting a policy of appeasement allowing Hitler to gain control of his Sudeten people. Also in his letter he stated without much detail his understanding that â€Å"Hitler had made his mind up to attack Czechoslovakia and head east, in such a timeframe that it would not be possible for Anglo French intervention†. The British Ambassador to Berlin, Sir Neville Henderson, referred to the Czechoslovakian President, Eduard Benes, as â€Å"pigheaded† and claimed he could become the reason for a second world war. Henderson writing to Lord Halifax from the British embassy in Berlin statedShow MoreRelatedWhy Did Britain and France Accept to the Munich Agreement?2221 Words   |  9 PagesWhy did Britain and France accept to the Munich Agreement? On 29 September 1938, the four leaders of Germany, Italy, Britain and France signed an agreement on the fate of the Sudeten territory in Czechoslovakia, without the Czechoslovak authorities present, which, it would seem at the time, was a guarantee of peace. Such was the premise of the event, but in reality it represented the abandonment of Czechoslovakia (Weinberg, 1988: 165), by France in particular, and the naà ¯ve nature of the foreignRead More Causes of World War II Essay2009 Words   |  9 PagesPacific and thereby launched a program of expansion. But Japan was angered by the peacemakers failure to endorse the principle of the equality of all races. The countries that lost World War I--Germany, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey--were especially dissatisfied with the Peace of Paris. They were stripped of territory, arms and were required to make reparations (payments for war damages). The Treaty of Versailles, which was signed with Germany, punished Germany severely. The GermanRead MoreEvents Leading Up To World War 22067 Words   |  9 PagesPacific and thereby launched a program of expansion. But Japan was angered by the peacemakers failure to endorse the principle of the equality of all races. The countries that lost World War I--Germany, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey--were especially dissatisfied with the Peace of Paris. They were stripped of territory, arms and were required to make reparations (payments for war damages). The Treaty of Versailles, which was signed with Germany, punished Germany severely. The German governmentRead More Appeasement Essay4194 Words   |  17 Pagesfuture war, through whatever means necessary. In the aftermath of World War 1, lay a mutual understanding between the British government and society that never again should a catastrophe such as World War 1 occur, it was described as the war to end all wars reinforcing the view that it was a cataclysmic event which should never be re-enacted upon society. British public became disillusioned with the use of force in international relations and as a result sought an approach consisting of an effectiveRead MoreThe Second World War2302 Words   |  10 PagesSecond World War World War II was one of the greatest struggles humanity has ever seen. This Second World War caused many lives to be lost, damaged personal properties and was expensive, for a great deal of money was required to maintain a country’s military strength. The numbers for those that have passed, been wounded or gone missing during the war could never be calculated precisely; though it has been estimated that more than 55 million lives perished. Many historians have traced the causes ofRead MoreHitler : Man Of Year1762 Words   |  8 PagesHitler: Man of Year, 1938 Francisco Franco, Benito Mussolini, Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler: these four men are still considered some of the most ruthless dictators of the 20th century. Together they accounted for millions of deaths during their terrible reigns as supreme leader in their respective countries. However, one in this group stands apart from the rest. Only one of these men was named Time Magazine Man of the Year. This very man would be the one and only Adolf Hitler. On January 2, 1939, AdolfRead MoreToday, The Appeasement Policy That Britain And France In1741 Words   |  7 Pagesperiod of German aggression, was one of the main factors historians would consider to have caused the Second World War. Had the British or any of the Allied powers, intervened in Nazi expansionism, the war could have been prevented as early as 1936, when Germany violated the Treaty of Versailles with the occupation of the Rhineland. The Appeasement is seen as the act of cowardice and of poor judgement of the world powers. Br itain, in particular, is in the spotlight. It was still considered the majorRead MoreWorld War I Was A Great Problem1862 Words   |  8 Pagesroad to recovery hard to navigate. The interwar period was unstable and a number of events and circumstances arguably made the Second World War inevitable. Marshal Ferdinand Foch described the interwar years as â€Å"not a peace† but â€Å"an armistice for twenty years† (Paul Reynolds: Memoires: 1963: p.457). The breakdown of economics, the failure of post-war treaties and the rise of Hitler are all events that meant that the outbreak of World War II was almost unpreventable and the interwar years were simply

Leadership Theory And The Main Methods Of Leadership

Leadership is an often misunderstood concept. Many people confuse management and leadership, classifying them as being the same. While a leader can be a manager and a manager can be a leader, they are often two separate things. There are four main components of leadership that we will discuss and there are many different ways to view and examine leadership with theory and maxim being the main methods. As many people point out, leadership is a complex topic to discuss. Leadership can mean many different things to different people. Leadership can be a combination of something a person is born with as well as something that someone acquires. On a very basic level, leadership can be defined as a process that involves influence, occurs†¦show more content†¦As with anything in life, one person’s view of something isn’t a very good judge. It takes many views and research to back it up. Leadership theories are a variety of explanations with scientific data to back up those explanations. Theories are used in many different aspects of the world because they are reliable. The difference between maxims and theories is the proof that backs up the explanations. When reviewing leadership it will be most effective to use theories so as to have supporting scientific documentation. There seems to be little usefulness with maxims, particularly when evaluating leadership. When evaluating leadership, theory will be the most important method of analysis. Forming a theory on leadership is providing explanations as well as scientific data to back it up. On example of a leadership theory will be trait theories. â€Å"Trait theories often identify particular personality or behavioral characteristics shared by leaders.† (Cherry, 2014) Trait Theories are theories that have been researched and there is scientific data to support trait theories. â€Å"Throughout the years, researchers have identified a multitude of traits that are associated with leadership.† (Northouse, 2015) When reviewing leadership, there are four main components and they include: being a process, involving influence, occurring in a group, and involving goal attainment. (Introduction to Leadership,

The Start of the Contamination in Man’s Environment Free Essays

In the late 1960s to 1970s, Americans realized that industry was doing serious damage to air, water, and the earth itself, the most essential natural resources. The whole awareness of the damage being done to the environment stemmed out from the energy crisis of the 1970s. The energy crisis was a ‘slap-in-the-face’ for America. We will write a custom essay sample on The Start of the Contamination in Man’s Environment or any similar topic only for you Order Now They needed to realize the harm that was being done to the natural resources and their decreasing availability as a result. With the decreasing availability and increasing prices of oil, new energy sources had to be discovered. Although scientists found nuclear power to be a clean, cheap, and unlimited source of power at first, the environmentalists fought to minimize its usage for fear of nuclear meltdowns, which could spread nuclear waste. Alternative energy sources were possible, and what appeared to be the most effective were tidal energy and solar energy. These environmentally safe methods of harnessing energy were just what the environmentalists had aimed for, and a new movement had been started – environmentalism. If you read this circle it. The environmentalists also tried to advocate the conservation of energy, so that the cleaner but less effective ways could be manipulated to produce more energy. Despite many efforts to keep the environment clean, some 200 million tons of pollutants were filling the air each year, and clean air in many cities had been replaced by smog. The earth, air, and water were deteriorating as construction of highways, malls, and housing developments caused the destruction of fertile, irreplaceable farmland. Disposal of wastes was another dilemma to be dealt with. Burning could release poisonous gases into the air, and burial could cause harmful decay. By the mid-1960s, people began to really realize the need to conserve the nation’s resources. Much credit for arousing public concern belonged to Rachel Carson for her book Silent Spring. This book warned of the central problem of our age being the contamination of man’s environment. During the next few years, growing numbers of ecologists, biologists, and other scientists showed their concern about the reckless abuse of the environment. In 1970, Congress created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which helped set laws regulating use of pesticides, insecticides, and other potentially dangerous sprays. They protected endangered wildlife, and ordered that car manufacturers had to provide pollution control devices on exhausts of their vehicles. New waste disposal and sewage treatment plants were being built to prevent further pollution of the land and water and to clean up the rivers and lakes. Government also regulated unsightly junkyards and dumps to restore the natural beauty of the countryside. Federal government set aside more areas as national parks, not to be tampered with, and considerable progress had been made in the management and conservation of America’s forests, soil, and water. However, many people felt that it was not necessary for the government to take all this action. President Reagan gave in and allowed the search for minerals on federal lands and oil exploration off the coast of California, which some felt was very risky, because of the chance of an oil spill, which would devastate all ocean life in the area. Environmental decisions were important in the sixties era, as many other nations followed them with concern. With the world’s population increasing so rapidly, the earth’s natural resources will be heavily taxed, and many people, the environmentalists, believed that resource conservation was extremely important in maintaining the living conditions of the world population. How to cite The Start of the Contamination in Man’s Environment, Essay examples

Philosophy 101 Study Guide free essay sample

When: Thursday, the 26th Day of September, 2013, 3:00pm – 4:15pm Where: The same location our class normally meets What to bring: Your ASU Student ID, for when you hand in your exam An Exam book (blue book or green book) available at the bookstore A Scan-tron form (bubble-in forms) available at the bookstore TWO number 2 pencils for filling in the scantron form A blue or black ink pen (optional – pencil ok), for your exam book. I will not have extras available. If you forget yours, you’ll have to rely on the kindness of your peers or else run to the bookstore to buy some, losing you valuable time. If you bring extras for your peers, they will be supremely grateful. Structure of the Exam The exam will consist of: †¢60 multiple choice questions (for Scantron form) †¢Worth 4 points each †¢240 points total †¢questions limited to topics covered on this study guide †¢1 essay question (for exam book) †¢worth 60 points total †¢questions will be broad and comprehensive for Unit 1. †¢Answer should be 4-5 paragraphs Study Guide Warranty IF: you fill out this study guide completely based on your notes, the readings, and the lectures, making a recognizably serious attempt to put in relevant and correct information, and you turn in the completed study guide prior to the exam, either †¢as a MS Word attachment sent by e-mail to [emailprotected], with the subject line â€Å"PHI 101 STUDY GUIDE WARRANTY†, or †¢as a paper copy turned in to the SHPRS office on the 4th floor of Coor hall, time-stamped and clearly marked on the top page â€Å"Jeff Watson, Phi 101†, or †¢as a paper copy turned in on the day of the exam prior to picking up your exam. and you take the quiz and answer all 60 of the multiple-choice true/false questions. THEN:  On the multiple-choice section of the exam, you will receive at least 173 out of 240 points (72%, equivalent to a B-/C+). †¢If you receive fewer than 173 points on the multiple-choice section, and you turned in the completed study guide, then contact me after the exam, and I will automatically raise your grade on the multiple-choice section to 173 points. †¢No warranties are here given for the essay portion of the exam. †¢If you don’t take advantage of this warranty, and you get less than 173 points, no excuses or complaints. STUDY GUIDE FOR MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS From Solomon’s Little Philosophy Book: Chapter 1 What did the followers of Confucius teach? How did Confucius’s virtues differ from Socrates? Socrates emphasized the importance of the individual soul, however; Confucius insisted that what was most important in life were one’s relationships with other people. Confucius wanted to live life the right way by being honorable and faithful while Socrates believed living life the right way had to do with looking after the good of one’s own soul. Confucius teaches that one follows the dao by being respectful of the customs of one’s society, by being deferential to one’s parents, and by being a good citizen. What did the Daoists teach? How did they differ from the Confucians? Daoists act â€Å"more towards nature† rather than relating with social proprieties. They liked living naturally and a simple and respectful life. Daoist teachings aren’t teachers but rather paths that guide people to finding their true natural selves. What did Buddhism teach about the self? The Buddha taught that not only individuality but the universe as a whole was something of an illusion. Focuses less on individual self and more on living in harmony with the larger spiritual world, like Daoism. Who were Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle? How did they know each other? They were all early philosophers, Socrates wrote nothing down; Plato his prized student wrote down everything and that’s how we know about it/him and Aristotle was Plato’s student. Chapter 4 What’s the difference between local skepticism and global skepticism? Local skepticism is the view that one can not possess knowledge in some particular domain. Global skepticism is the view that one can not know anything at all. Why did Descartes insist that we begin by doubting everything we thought we knew? His aim was to use this method of doubting everything you know to discover what we actually do know for certain. So we can prove them. What did Hume argue we cannot prove about our experiences and the real world? Hume argues that we cannot prove that there is a real world outside our experience, much less that our experience is an accurate representation of that world. He says we need to get outside our experience to see whether it does fairly represent the world, however, its near impossible to do that. What did Hume believe about the laws of nature? Hume states that hoe do we know that the laws of nature tomorrow will be the same as the ones today, we only have the past to rely on which doesn’t say much about the future. We cannot prove the laws of nature and their existence. What does Solomon think is the â€Å"healthy† kind of skepticism? It means not simply taking at face value what other people tell you or simply accepting â€Å"common sense† without thinking about it on your own. You are able to think it out for yourself and figure out where your beliefs come from and how you would back them up. Plato’s Apology (‘the Trial of Socrates’) What happened in the Apology? Socrates is charged for not regarding the gods correctly, creating new deities and corrupting the youth of Athens, so he makes this speech the ‘Apology’ to defend himself. How did Socrates defend himself against Meletus? He makes Meletus feel like a fool and makes him question everything he says. How did he interpret the words of the Oracle at Delphi? He used the notion that the oracle told him that no one was smarter than him to go an interrogate everyone, and be a nuisance to the people. He took it as a riddle, he knew he had no wisdom and gods didn’t lie. What punishment did he offer to accept? He is sentenced to death. Locke’s Essay ‘On Enthusiasm’ What is â€Å"enthusiasm†? Enthusiasm is a vain and unfounded confidence in divine favor or communication, Locke strongly rejects it. What’s the unerring mark of the lover of truth for truth’s sake? One unerring mark of the love of truth is not entertaining any proposition with greater assurance than the proofs it is built upon will warrant. Not entertaining any proposition with greater assurance than the proofs it is built upon will warrant. Assuming an authority to dictate the opinions of others is a sign of what? The assuming an authority of dictating to others, and a forwardness to prescribe to their opinions, is a constant concomitant of this bias and corruption of our own judgements. How does evidence for something’s rectitude (or truth) relate to the strength of our persuasions about it? The strength of our persuasions is no evidence at all of their own rectitude: crooked things may be as stiff and inflexible as straight: and men may be as positive and peremptory in error as in truth. Only have strength in your own persuasion. How should our degree of belief relate to the evidence? Our degree of belief guides us to all answers, it’s our greatest form of persuasion and our biggest evidence. Why does Locke think his opponents’ arguments are circular? It is a revelation because they firmly believe it, and they believe it because it is a revelation. Based on Locke’s view, what’s the best way to develop a character that allows others the freedom to hold their own opinions? Guide to Philosophical Argument (the Standard View†¦): What is and isn’t a representation? A picture of you may be a representation of you, but it’s not you. It’s how someone or yourself can view you. But you can always misinterpret a representation What’s a proposition? Propositions are representations of the world which are in some sense language-independent. What makes a proposition true or false is whether the proposition corresponds to a fact. If it corresponds it’s true, if not, no. What is a fact? What is an opinion? Facts are things which we know for certain (however there can be facts about things people don’t even know) and opinions are things which we don’t really know, and we have a thought or suggestion about it. What’s the difference between being vague, ambiguous, and relative? Something can be vague but not ambiguous, or vice versa. Bat is ambiguous but not vague. And relativism: A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them. What sorts of things might make a relative truth true? There is no truth, everything is a matter of opinion. However, if all the facts are true then it might be true. What’s the difference between sense and reference? The sense of the word is the concept the word expresses and the what the word refers to is the object, entity or property in the world that it stands for. Mammal- sense of the word animals with mammary glands and whatnot, reference whales, lions and tigers for example. How could a word have no referent? Like the word unicorn, there’s a sense of it; a horse with a horn on it’s head. But its mythical and doesn’t exist so there are no unicorns which leave it with no reference. How could a word have no sense? Then there’s a word like love, everyone has a different sense of love so there’s no one universal sense to it. How would two words have different senses but the same referent? President of America, refers to Barack Obama but could refer to someone else in 4 years. Why are all opinions either true or false? Opinions are beliefs about what facts are, so one person’s beliefs may end up to be true and one’s may not. If I have so much evidence that I must believe something, why could it still be false? I can think I can fly by just flapping my arms, but there are rules of gravity that allow me not to fly, so it’s difficult to believe it’s true. How would you recognize an inductive argument? Inductive arguments start with a series of particular truths about individual instances, and draw a general conclusion about a large group of instances. How would you recognize a deductive argument? Deductive arguments can start with â€Å"Ifthen†¦Ã¢â‚¬  statements, or â€Å"either†¦.or†¦Ã¢â‚¬  statements, and lastly Reductio arguments which involve believing something, then finding a contradiction in the belief and then proving it false. How would you recognize an abductive argument? Abductive arguments are weak, all they prove is that there is a plausible working hypothesis, not that it’s true or false. What’s the difference between logical necessity/possibility, epistemic necessity/possibility, and natural (or ‘nomic’) necessity/possibility. Logical possibility is the broadest sense of ‘possible’, its a scenario which contains no contradictions. Logical necessity means that every possible way the world could be is one in which the proposition is true (all cats are cats). Epistemic possibility, given the evidence I have, something is probably highly unlikely to be true (pigs can fly). Natural possibility, something might be logically possible but contradict with one of the laws of nature. (flyings example but violates law of gravity). What’s it mean for an argument to be valid? An argument is valid when, and only when, there is no logical possibility of the premises being true and the conclusion being false. How would you recognize a valid argument? A valid argument says the it must be logically impossible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true. (All dogs are mammals, Old Yeller is a dog, Old Yeller is a mammal.) What’s it mean for an argument to be sound? All the premises are true, and the argument is valid. What is the doctrine of recollection? It’s the idea that we are born possessing all knowledge and our realization of that knowledge is contingent on our discovery of it. Our soul once knew everything and forgot it, so we are recollecting all the knowledge. What’s Socrates’s argument for the doctrine of recollection? Socrates’s conclusion: the soul is immortal, because the truth of all things has always existed in the soul. What does Socrates think the boy’s knowledge of geometry shows? That he had the previous knowledge already, a priori knowledge. Why does Socrates argue that Meno’s boy slave has a priori knowledge? Because when he tested him on geometry, the slave was able to get the correct answer because he already had the knowledge in him, he just had to recollect it. Socrates holds that a priori knowledge comes from where? Plato is a(n): empiricistrationalist idealist? From Descartes’s Meditations 1st meditation: Meditator looks back on all the falsehoods and realizes he could have doubted everything, he starts to doubt all the foundations and big things. Ends up realizing even simple things can be doubted. Why did Descartes begin his process of doubting the existence of the external  world? However, his purpose wasn’t to achieve tranquility, but to reveal the foundations of knowledge.It was not because he really didn’t believe we could know anything. It was because he wanted to know what ultimately, at the bottom level, justified all of our other beliefs. Which 3 arguments does Descartes offer to get himself to doubt? 1. My senses have deceived me. (mirages, etc.) 2. I could be dreaming this all up (very complicated dream). 3. God or an evil demon are making us doubt everything and not fully believe it. Why doesn’t the deceitfulness of his senses give Descartes reason to doubt everything? Only made him a local skeptic, not a global skeptic, dealt with small matters. What never changes in Descartes’s dreams? Arithmetic and geometry never change. 2nd meditation: The meditator doubts ‘I’ and if he even exists. Uses the wax experiment, knows the wax exists and studies its being. He uses it as a comparison to himself and realizes happily that he does indeed exist and that his mind is better known than his body, and that all clear and distinct perceptions come by means of the intellect alone, and not the senses or the imagination. What is the one thing that Descartes can’t doubt? Can he doubt his existence. How does Descartes know that he exists? He knows he’s having thoughts, and he’s capable of thinking, and something is doing the thinking. (wax experiment). According to Descartes, what is he? A thinking thing (immaterial soul). 3rd meditation: Proof of god being a perfect being. Why does Descartes think that an infinitely perfect God must exist? Because the universe couldn’t have come from nothing, something had to create it and he’s obviously not powerful enough to. 4th meditation: Descartes is now certain of god’s existence and questions his motives. God must be responsible for his judgement, but the Mediator doesn’t think himself as a supreme being like God. If god is a perfect being, he should be able to create perfect beings. But he now looks at God as a whole to see his perfection. How does Descartes use God’s existence as a foundation for all other knowledge? He uses it to see if God created everything perfectly and if God is the one who controls everything. And God created the perfect universe. What is foundationalism? Why does Descartes hold to it? In philosophy, foundationalism is an epistemological theory which holds that basic beliefs exist and are the foundation for all other justified beliefs. The theory rests on the assumption that beliefs must be justified by other beliefs. Even if his beliefs about the external world were false, his beliefs about what he was experiencing were still indubitably true, even if those perceptions do not relate to anything in the world 5th meditation: â€Å"The essence of material things, and considering the existence of God for a second time†. Clear and distinct perceptions are always convincing, according to the Meditator. He sets out to create an analogy between triangles and pythagorean theorem and God, saying he can prove its existence. Why does Descartes think that the most perfect being conceivable can’t fail to exist? The most perfect being has to exist because something had to have created the perfect universe. Has to prove that his sense are real and the external world exists. Descartes is a(n): empiricistrationalist idealist? Lecture on Epistemology: If you know that p, then what follows? Then p must be true; you must believe p; you must be justified in believing p; your justification must have some sort of explanation (can’t just be luck). What does â€Å"justification† mean, and what is its relationship to knowledge? A justified belief is one you rationally ought to hold, given the evidence that you have. You can’t claim to know that you are going to get a job if you don’t have the evidence for it that warrants you in believing it. What are the three types of experiences which can justify beliefs about the external world? Three types of empirical justifications: perception, memory and testimony. What is a priori justification? Its a rational justification which means â€Å"rational intuition† or â€Å"pure reason†. What’s a rationalist believe about knowledge? Who were the rationalists? Essentially, rationalists believe that (some) knowledge can be acquired through reason alone or, to put it another way, you can come to know about the world by thinking about it. Thinking about the world logically allows you to construct a complete system or entire set of rules that explain everything. Rationalists tended to believe that knowledge is a bit like maths and that, by thinking clearly enough about things, you can come to know everything without ever having to actually look at the world. As a result rationalists believed in a priori knowledge, knowledge that comes before experience. Descartes was a rationalist. What’s an empiricist believe about knowledge? Who are the empiricists? Both groups believe in the importance of reason and both groups contain scientists but empiricists believe that reason alone is not enough and that you need to provide your reason with material to work on †¦ which you can only acquire through your senses. As such, for the empiricists, perception is the source of all knowledge and reason just works on the evidence or perception that perception provides., empiricists to believe that all knowledge was more like science and that things could only be known a posteriori, i.e. after or through experience. As such, in order to find out about the world you have to conduct a series of experiments on it and then use reason to work out what those results mean. John Locke was an empiricist. From Locke’s ‘Knowledge through Experience’ Where does Locke believe that all of the materials of reason, and all knowledge, come from? For Locke, all knowledge comes exclusively through experience. He argues that at birth the mind is a tabula rasa, or blank slate, that humans fill with ideas as they experience the world through the five senses. Locke defines knowledge as the connection and agreement, or disagreement and repugnancy, of the ideas humans form. Does Locke believe in innate ideas? Why or why not? Locke argued that the mind is in fact devoid of all knowledge or ideas at birth; it is a blank sheet or tabula rasa. He argued that all our ideas are constructed in the mind via a process of constant composition and decomposition of the input that we receive through our senses. Locke is a(n): empiricistrationalist idealist? Hume’s ‘Experience and the Limits of Human Reason’ Can we trust that the future will resemble the past? Why or why not? We cannot justify our assumptions about the future based on past experience unless there is a law that the future will always resemble the past. No such law exists. We can deny the relationship without contradiction and we cannot justify it with experience. Therefore, we have no rational support for believing in causation. What is the origin of our ideas? We construct ideas from simple impressions in three ways: resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect. How are ideas distinct from impressions? Hume begins by noting that the perceptions of memory, imagination, etc., are never as forceful or vivacious as our first-hand perceptions of the real world. Impressions: These are the lively, first-hand perceptions, either of something external (e.g., sensation) or internal (e.g., emotion, desiring, willing). Ideas: These are the less forceful, less lively perceptions, which occur when we reflect on previous impressions (e.g., via the memory, imagination, etc.). †¢ Where do we get the idea of causation, according to Hume? Hume claims that causation is a habit of association, a belief that is unfounded and meaningless. He notes that when we repeatedly observe one event following another, our assumption that we are witnessing cause and effect seems logical to us. What does â€Å"C causes E† mean, on Hume’s account? Cause and Effect. Fire causes heat. etc. Hume is is a(n): empiricistrationalist idealist? Berkeley: What did Berkeley believe about the real world and the world of experiences? They hold instead the mechanistic world view, which denies that the world is as we perceive it, and insists that the physical world is composed of entities possessing only the primary properties of extension. All of the  secondary properties we perceive physical objects as having, in reality exist only in our perceptions, not in the objects themselves. Berkeley is a(n): empiricistrationalist idealist? Kant According to Kant, what ‘world’ can we know, and what world can’t we know? We can be said to know things about the world, then, not because we somehow step outside of our minds to compare what we experience with some reality outside of it, but rather because the world we know is always already organized according to a certain fixed (innate) pattern that is the mind, the rationalists are right in saying that we can know about things in the world with certainty; and the empiricists are right in saying that such knowledge cannot be limited merely to truths by definition nor can it be provided by experience. What does Kant mean by â€Å"phenomena?† Kant theorizes that the human mind is restricted to the logical world and thus can only interpret and understand occurrences according to their physical appearances. He wrote that humans could infer only as much as their senses allowed, but not experience the actual object itself. According to Kant, how do we have knowledge of a priori truths? According to Kant, a priori knowledge is based on the form of all possible experience. Kant thinks that a priori knowledge, in its pure form, that is without the admixture of any empirical content, is knowledge limited to the deduction of the conditions of possible experience.

COSO Framework for an Organization Free Samples for Students

Questions: Consider the COSO Framework. Write an Internal environment that you are Familiar with and complete the COSO Framework for this Environment as outlined below. 1.State the control objectives. 2.. Identify the risk sources. 3.. Perform a risk assessment 4. Develop a risk response 5. Determine the control activities 6. Provide a method of informing and communicating the results 7.Discuss the process that is used for monitoring the information Answers: 1.Control objectives Credit should be extended to credit worthy customers. Goods should not be dispatched without an invoice being raised. Overdue accounts should be promptly followed up. Receipt from cash sales should be properly controlled. No unauthorized credit entries should be made to debtors account balances. 2.Risk sources Goods being dispatched without being involved Goods being sold to a bad credit risk Sales being invoiced but not recorded Doubtful debts 3.Risk assessment The risks involved in internal control system over sales and debtors are assessed on a residual basis and an inherent basis. The process involves determining the likelihood and impact of the risks above on the organization. Various tools such as Qualitative risk analysis, maximum loss estimation and fault tree estimation are used in determining the impact of the risks. After the risk assessment process, the risks are then prioritized in accordance to their risk rating. 4.Risk response After the risks facing the internal control system over sales and debtors have been assessed and prioritized, the best risk response is formulated. These responses include avoidance, acceptance, sharing or reduction. Some of the risks such as selling of the goods to a bad credit risk are avoided by not dealing with such customer. However, not all risks can be avoided and therefore risks such as doubtful debts can be dealt with by transferring them to a factoring company. 5.The control activities Customers are approved before a credit facility is granted. The credit limit granted is formally authorized after seeking references on the customers ability to pay. Such references are normally provided by banks suppliers and credit reference bureaus. Customers are approved for sales only when the customers credit limit has not been exceeded. The sales personnel ensure that they have up to date records of customers outstanding balances. Goods only be dispatched against a valid and an authorized sales order. All dispatches of goods and return inwards are accurately recorded All dispatches are involved. This can be achieved by checking copies of the sales order to the dispatch records the use of sequentially numbered documents would ensure that all sales are invoiced. Invoices and credit notes are accurately prepared from approved price list and all discounts or price deduction are properly approved. Price list and all trade discounts and price deduction are properly authorized. Creditors notes and other adjustments are prepared against authorized return inwards or other appropriate documents. To prevent fraud, there are proper segregation of duties such that the person who authorizes a sale is not able to authorize the issue of a credit note or other adjustments. All bad debts written off are properly authorized and recorded. Persons involved with original authorization of sales and granting credit to customers should not be involved in the authorization of bad debts write offs. Stocks records are accurately updated with all sales and sales returns All transactions are accurately posted to the ledger Sales ledger balances are regularly reconciled to sales ledger control balances to ensure completeness and accuracy of the ledger. Sales ledger balances are periodically aged and reviewed by the credit control staff. Overdue accounts are identified and followed up for collection. 6.A method of informing and communicating the results The information pertaining to the risks is disseminated through several ways including: risk reports, newsletters, notice boards, internal audit reports, electronic mail and internet websites to the appropriate personnel in the organization. 7.The process that is used for monitoring the information The entire process is monitored is closely monitored through ongoing management processes and separate evaluations. Tools used in monitoring of the risks include: Internal audit, Risk reporting, Risk register, Creation of the risk management department and Risk policies, governance and procedures.