PHI 105 Topic 4 Assignments Only

PHI 105 Topic 4 Assignments Only

(PHI 105 Topic 4 Assignments)

PHI 105 Topic 4 Assignment: Persuasive Essay: Outline Worksheet

Complete the Persuasive Essay: Outline Worksheet. Review the grading checklist for this assignment at the end of the worksheet to ensure successful completion.

Permalink: https://collepals.com//phi-105-topic-4-assignments-only/

PHI 105 Topic 4 Quiz: Fallacies In Everyday Life Quiz (2 Versions)

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INFO 

Fallacies In Everyday Life

Introduction

If you’ve been on the internet for more than five minutes, there’s a good chance that you’ve run into some form of fallacious reasoning. Fallacies are common in everyday life and can fool even the most rational people. In this article, we’ll explore six common fallacies and how to avoid falling victim to them in your own life.

The gambler’s fallacy

The gambler’s fallacy is a common error in reasoning that results from the assumption that past events influence future ones. In other words, it’s the belief that if you win one time then you’ll be able to win again next time. This isn’t necessarily true: there are no guarantees in life (or at least none worth spending money on). If your friend bets $20 on a coin toss and loses, he’s likely going to lose his next bet too because he doesn’t know what “occurred” when he lost last time—he could have been unlucky or hit against another coin or something else entirely happened during those two flips of fate!

This fallacy can also be used as an explanation for why people believe in superstitions: if something bad happens to them after doing something like wearing red shoes or crossing their fingers five times before opening their eyes each morning then they must have done something wrong beforehand! But these kinds of beliefs aren’t supported by scientific evidence either way; they’re just assumptions based on personal experience with whatever happened originally (in this case being struck by lightning). It may seem sensible at first glance but once we start thinking about it more closely we realize how unlikely such scenarios really are compared against all possible alternatives–and even if one were true then wouldn’t changing anything change anything else?

Survivorship bias

Survivorship bias is the tendency to focus on successful examples, while ignoring the potentially relevant cases that did not achieve the same positive result.

The term “survivorship bias” was coined by John Hopkins economist Peter Diamond in his 1969 paper “A Statistical Experiment on Mortality and Life Expectancy.” He was investigating whether it is possible to predict how long someone will live based on their age at death. He wanted to show that when people give up smoking they tend to die younger than those who don’t quit—and therefore conclude from this that quitting smoking can extend life expectancy; however, he found no such effect. This could be explained as follows: most people who stop smoking do so before age 60 (because there are fewer smokers), so only those who survive past this point are considered for analysis; thus only those who quit early would seem likely candidates for longer lives after quitting—but these may not actually be representative of all smokers’ longevity due further problems with survivorship bias!

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

The post hoc fallacy is committed when we assume that because one thing follows another, it must have caused the other. This can be a problem in real life because sometimes things happen for no apparent reason and cannot be explained by their past behavior. However, this logic is fallacious because it assumes that there has to be a cause-and-effect relationship between two events if they are not directly connected.

To avoid this fallacy, you should always look at all possible explanations before making a conclusion based on only one of them (i.e., “the first thing happened so therefore the second thing had to happen”). For example: If your friend takes off on an adventure after leaving home early in the morning but doesn’t return until late evening—that’s great! You don’t need to assume anything about what happened next; just enjoy being with him/her wherever he/she goes next!

False dichotomy

A false dichotomy is a situation where there are only two possible outcomes. It’s often used to argue that a situation is black and white when in fact it isn’t, as when you say “You either like it or you don’t.”

Unfortunately, this fallacy can be extremely convincing because of its simplicity and familiarity. For example:

• You’re trying to decide if you should cut your hair or not? Well then, choose one of those options! Either yes or no for cutting my hair!

Slippery slope

Slippery slope is a fallacy that occurs when you assume that because one thing has happened, another will also happen. For example, if someone cuts down a tree and then burns it to make paper (which is what was done in this case), then they’ll have to cut down more trees to get wood for their new paper. This can be used as an argument for why something should be illegal or against the law.

However, this does not necessarily mean that people will stop doing whatever caused all those other problems in the first place—for example: if people stopped using fossil fuels because their factories were polluting them with chemicals like benzene; then suddenly there would be no way for factories anymore! So even though we don’t want any more pollution than necessary…the lack of fossil fuel use could actually cause even worse problems than what we’re currently experiencing now due to climate change etcetera…

Appeal to popularity

Appeal to popularity is a type of appeal to emotion. It occurs when the speaker makes a claim based on how many other people agree with it, rather than how well-founded or true the argument actually is.

For example: “I really like this song because everyone else likes it too!” or “Oh man! You’ve got such great taste in music!” This kind of comment doesn’t prove anything about your taste—it just suggests that other people share your tastes and so should you!

Appeal to tradition

The appeal to tradition fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is good or bad based on its long-term acceptance.

It can be used when discussing the merits of a particular practice, saying “but we’ve always done it this way.” For example: “We should have an elected president because our founding fathers wanted it this way.” This example relies on past events which have already occurred and therefore cannot be changed.

Another example might be someone saying “I’m not going out tonight because my grandmother told me not to go out after dark anymore.” In fact, no one person has ever told anyone else what they should do with their life; thus this person’s grandmother has no real authority over him/her and should not be given any more weight than anyone else would give if asked about his/her opinion on this matter

Appeal to authority

The appeal to authority is a fallacy in which a person refers to an authority as proof of the truth of their statement. An appeal to authority can be used in many ways, but it usually involves someone citing an expert as evidence for or against their claim. The authority cited need not be qualified as an expert; they may simply have more knowledge than you do.

In some cases, this argument may carry some weight because the person making it has studied enough about your subject matter and has been able to verify what they say by means of research or personal experience. However, this isn’t always true: sometimes people cite experts just because they think those individuals will agree with them (or at least not challenge them). In this case, the experts you cite may actually be unreliable sources for information about your topic!

If you want to think critically, you can avoid being fooled by common fallacies.

One of the most important things you can do to improve your critical thinking skills is to learn about common fallacies.

You should be able to recognize when someone is trying to persuade you with a fallacy, and then respond appropriately. For example:

• Appeal to authority (e.g., “Your doctor says we need this”)

• Appeal to popularity (e.g., “Everyone does it”)

• Appeal to tradition (e.g., “We’ve always done it this way”)

Appeal-to-authority appeals because it’s easy for us humans—we like having our thoughts confirmed by others who have expertise in their fields! This type of fallacy often gets blamed on doctors, teachers and scientists who are assumed always know what they’re talking about because they’ve studied hard enough at school or university; but sometimes these people don’t know anything more than anyone else does! They might claim things like “I’m an expert” without ever having actually worked in any particular field before… So just because someone claims something as true doesn’t mean that everyone else believes them too – especially if there’s evidence against them!

Conclusion

You may not be aware of all the fallacies you’re engaging in, but that doesn’t mean you can’t avoid them. By becoming more aware of your own biases, you can start to recognize when you’re being swept away by an illusion. It’s a process that should take effort, but it will pay off in the long run—because once you start thinking critically about everyday situations, it will become easier to do so throughout your life!