The channel is now live! We've started developing the first series in Critical Thinking, focused on the informal fallacies. Here's the very first video in it. We'll be adding a LOT of additional content over the next few months!
Ohh thank god! I’ve wanted to learn more about this and been searching for someone who knows what they’re talking about and has a nice voice 🙌🏼 thank you for passing on what you’ve learned!
In my younger years i held the assumption that i was a reasonably intelligent person and most of my ideas and positions were very reasonable, well formed and correct. The older i get the more i realize that most of my ideas, just like everyone elses are probably not as good as id like to believe.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I had been trying to find a good book on critical thinking for some time and I read a few but didn't like them cause they were too simple. Now I have found what I was looking for all the time. Thank you
I have posted two of your vids on my Facebook timeline ... and I plan to post more vids of yours ... They are interesting. It is necessary that people learn about fallacies in reasoning ... because there are too many populists from all sides of the ideological, political and even scientific spectrum who are trying to rally people behind them using faulty reasoning.
Slippery Slope is only a fallacy if the argument is saying B MUST follow A, and C MUST follow B. That little detail is often over-looked. "If we lower the legal drinking age by two years, what is there to stop you doing so again later? What's to stop that process sooner or later meaning there is no legal drinking age?" "If we lower the legal drinking age by two years, then sooner or later you will lower it by four years, then by eight, and in the end there will be babies with beers in hand." Only one of those is a directly fallacious argument.
Thank you so much. Your explanations are very helpful on how to be a better critical thinker. Could you or someone in the audience help me with the problem with the following statement
Thank you for these videos Gregory! Thank you very much for making us more logical and, ultimately clever. And for free. It means a lot. If you pronounce petitio princippi in classical Latin you should say "peh-ti-tsih-oh prin-chi-peeh-ehh". This is the latin I learnt in school in Italy, I don't know if you should trust me :) I live in the UK but I still don't know the way the Anglo-Saxon world pronounce Latin :). Best, Andrea
Well, classical Latin has the hard "c" -- like "k". Ecclesiastical Latin has the soft "c" -- the "ch" sound. I learned classical Latin when I was a kid, and when I went on with Latin in grad school, eve though I was mainly working with medieval thinkers, I could never get the church Latin pronunciation to stick. . . .
continued from below: I recently heard someone say: "my wife is empathetic, but then again most Christians are empathetic". I had a visceral response to this statement since I am not Christian but I am not well versed in discussing fallacies to discuss this with this person. Is this statement a fallacy and if so what type and how would you discuss this with the person making the statement? Thank you!
I watched several of these Critical thinking videos today and enjoyed them. They were well done as always. Out of interest, does the word fallacy relate to phallus, the way that hysteria and the uterus are connected? Just an unusual thought?
Ellethekitty.ca Michelle No, nothing that funny, unfortunately! It's related to the verb, fallere, meaning "to make a mistake," "to deceive," among other things
hi there! i enjoy your videos very much :) so i have a question for you...can i use the reduction to absurdity thechnique all day long to confront any kind of fallacy?
It would be interesting to study the vids about Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss and other critical thinkers, to detect their fallacies ... or do you think they do not produce any ?
+Critical Thinking, Logic, and Argumentation (ReasonIO) That would be wonderful, because it seems to me that the critically thinking followers of these political actvists immediately loose their critical abilities when listening to these great minds when they act as political activists... The most common fallacies Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss produce are the "Appeal to Ridicule", the "Broad Brush", the "Strawman", the "Appeal to Emotion", "False Dichotomy", "Negative Labeling" ... and last but not least "Appeal to Authority" .. .... and what about equating a "quantum field" with "nothing" by these eminent scientists, including Stephen Hawking of all people ... Educated philosophers like you must shiver when they hear such philosophical statements in proving how the universe came from "nothing".
+Jo van de Kragt when krauss makes a statement like "the universe came from nothing," he's very careful to define "nothing" and provide evidential support. after all, even a sound argument is only as good as its premises, and premises rely on evidence. i'd be curious to know what type of fallacy you've detected (though that may be off-topic in this thread).
+DJcrazyguy .. The problem is that Krauss does not use the definition which describes "nothing" as the "absence of everything". Instead he uses the term "nothing" meaning a "quantum field in its lowest energy state", which is clearly "something" in my view. ( .. Where did this quantum field come from ? How did this come into being ? What was there before this quantum field was there ? You see that Krauss's definition of "Nothing" reintroduces the questions of "When and how did the universe ( this quantum field is the earliest fase of the universe) come into being ? Has this quantum field always been there or did it have a beginning ? How did this quantum field come into being ? What was there before this quantum field existed ? etc )The problem here is redefining a term to suit your own ( scientific or ideological ?) interests. +++++++ The fallacies in reasoning usually occur when Dawkins and Krauss are engaging in their work as political activists promoting their form of scientism. I mentioned these fallacies in my previous post.
interesting, i seem to remember that in "a universe from nothing," he explicitly mentions that "nothing" also means no fields. as i recall, it was no time/space/matter/energy/fields. perhaps i need to go back and watch that lecture again.
Had the poet said so in so many words, he would have been far less effective. Because, as I understand it, anything suggested is far more effective than anything laid down. Perhaps the human mind has the tendency to deny a statement. Remember what Emerson said: arguments convince nobody. They convince nobody because they are presented as arguments. Then we look at them, we weigh them, we turn them over, and we decide against them. But when something is merely said or--better still--hinted at, there is a kind of hospitality in our imagination. We are ready to accept it. From The Craft of Verse: The Norton Lectures, 1967-68, Jorge Luis Borges The metaphor part 2 at ubu.com/sound/borges.html I will be posting from time to time quotes that are connected in some way to argumentation. As it was said in a video it is not just a matter of acquiring knowledge of types of fallacies ;)
The channel is now live! We've started developing the first series in Critical Thinking, focused on the informal fallacies. Here's the very first video in it.
We'll be adding a LOT of additional content over the next few months!
Critical Thinking, Logic, and Argumentation (ReasonIO)
Ohh thank god! I’ve wanted to learn more about this and been searching for someone who knows what they’re talking about and has a nice voice 🙌🏼 thank you for passing on what you’ve learned!
Thank you for doing this series, can't wait to get started!
You're welcome!
In my younger years i held the assumption that i was a reasonably intelligent person and most of my ideas and positions were very reasonable, well formed and correct. The older i get the more i realize that most of my ideas, just like everyone elses are probably not as good as id like to believe.
Hey man thank you for these. Your videos got me interested I critical thinking and logic. Which has improved my life greatly. Very much appreciated
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
I had been trying to find a good book on critical thinking for some time and I read a few but didn't like them cause they were too simple. Now I have found what I was looking for all the time. Thank you
I have posted two of your vids on my Facebook timeline ... and I plan to post more vids of yours ... They are interesting. It is necessary that people learn about fallacies in reasoning ... because there are too many populists from all sides of the ideological, political and even scientific spectrum who are trying to rally people behind them using faulty reasoning.
Slippery Slope is only a fallacy if the argument is saying B MUST follow A, and C MUST follow B. That little detail is often over-looked.
"If we lower the legal drinking age by two years, what is there to stop you doing so again later? What's to stop that process sooner or later meaning there is no legal drinking age?"
"If we lower the legal drinking age by two years, then sooner or later you will lower it by four years, then by eight, and in the end there will be babies with beers in hand."
Only one of those is a directly fallacious argument.
You can easily make an inductive version of the argument that would be fallacious
Have these been transfered to spotify? Fantastic set of talks, big fan.
I'm really liking the new channel. Great job.
Thanks!
Thank you for the video.
You're welcome!
Thank you so much. Your explanations are very helpful on how to be a better critical thinker. Could you or someone in the audience help me with the problem with the following statement
Thank you for these videos Gregory! Thank you very much for making us more logical and, ultimately clever. And for free. It means a lot.
If you pronounce petitio princippi in classical Latin you should say "peh-ti-tsih-oh prin-chi-peeh-ehh". This is the latin I learnt in school in Italy, I don't know if you should trust me :) I live in the UK but I still don't know the way the Anglo-Saxon world pronounce Latin :). Best, Andrea
Well, classical Latin has the hard "c" -- like "k". Ecclesiastical Latin has the soft "c" -- the "ch" sound. I learned classical Latin when I was a kid, and when I went on with Latin in grad school, eve though I was mainly working with medieval thinkers, I could never get the church Latin pronunciation to stick. . . .
continued from below: I recently heard someone say: "my wife is empathetic, but then again most Christians are empathetic". I had a visceral response to this statement since I am not Christian but I am not well versed in discussing fallacies to discuss this with this person. Is this statement a fallacy and if so what type and how would you discuss this with the person making the statement? Thank you!
these are so great!
Glad you enjoy them
I watched several of these Critical thinking videos today and enjoyed them. They were well done as always. Out of interest, does the word fallacy relate to phallus, the way that hysteria and the uterus are connected? Just an unusual thought?
Ellethekitty.ca Michelle No, nothing that funny, unfortunately!
It's related to the verb, fallere, meaning "to make a mistake," "to deceive," among other things
Being able to think critically is the difference between having a hammer and being a carpenter.
Nice!
hi there! i enjoy your videos very much :) so i have a question for you...can i use the reduction to absurdity thechnique all day long to confront any kind of fallacy?
No - there's no one single approach that handles every kind of fallacy
Thanks for the video mate
You're welcome!
It would be interesting to study the vids about Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss and other critical thinkers, to detect their fallacies ... or do you think they do not produce any ?
+Jo van de Kragt They certainly engage in some, much like many others. Perhaps down the line, I'll do a series like that
+Critical Thinking, Logic, and Argumentation (ReasonIO) That would be wonderful, because it seems to me that the critically thinking followers of these political actvists immediately loose their critical abilities when listening to these great minds when they act as political activists... The most common fallacies Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss produce are the "Appeal to Ridicule", the "Broad Brush", the "Strawman", the "Appeal to Emotion", "False Dichotomy", "Negative Labeling" ... and last but not least "Appeal to Authority" .. .... and what about equating a "quantum field" with "nothing" by these eminent scientists, including Stephen Hawking of all people ... Educated philosophers like you must shiver when they hear such philosophical statements in proving how the universe came from "nothing".
+Jo van de Kragt when krauss makes a statement like "the universe came from nothing," he's very careful to define "nothing" and provide evidential support. after all, even a sound argument is only as good as its premises, and premises rely on evidence. i'd be curious to know what type of fallacy you've detected (though that may be off-topic in this thread).
+DJcrazyguy .. The problem is that Krauss does not use the definition which describes "nothing" as the "absence of everything". Instead he uses the term "nothing" meaning a "quantum field in its lowest energy state", which is clearly "something" in my view. ( .. Where did this quantum field come from ? How did this come into being ? What was there before this quantum field was there ? You see that Krauss's definition of "Nothing" reintroduces the questions of "When and how did the universe ( this quantum field is the earliest fase of the universe) come into being ? Has this quantum field always been there or did it have a beginning ? How did this quantum field come into being ? What was there before this quantum field existed ? etc )The problem here is redefining a term to suit your own ( scientific or ideological ?) interests. +++++++ The fallacies in reasoning usually occur when Dawkins and Krauss are engaging in their work as political activists promoting their form of scientism. I mentioned these fallacies in my previous post.
interesting, i seem to remember that in "a universe from nothing," he explicitly mentions that "nothing" also means no fields. as i recall, it was no time/space/matter/energy/fields. perhaps i need to go back and watch that lecture again.
Could someone explain the definition of Premise, please
Ashley Mtsac a premise is your stated assertion.
Had the poet said so in so many words, he would have been far less effective. Because, as I understand it, anything suggested is far more effective than anything laid down. Perhaps the human mind has the tendency to deny a statement. Remember what Emerson said: arguments convince nobody. They convince nobody because they are presented as arguments. Then we look at them, we weigh them, we turn them over, and we decide against them. But when something is merely said or--better still--hinted at, there is a kind of hospitality in our imagination. We are ready to accept it.
From The Craft of Verse: The Norton Lectures, 1967-68, Jorge Luis Borges
The metaphor part 2 at ubu.com/sound/borges.html
I will be posting from time to time quotes that are connected in some way to argumentation. As it was said in a video it is not just a matter of acquiring knowledge of types of fallacies ;)
Only post things that are relevant to the topic -- not loosely so, but actually so
Critical Thinking, Logic, and Argumentation definitely ;)