Logical Fallacies with Dr. Michael Labossiere

[Sophocles]

My impression is that the justice system we practice today is more about arguing for the sake of being right and less about actually finding out the truth.

And I think Gerald Crabtree (http://usa.greekreporter.com/2013/02/22/ancient-greeks-smarter-than-us/) (Professor of Pathology and Developmental Biology at Stanford University School of Medicine) is right when saying “I would wager that if an average citizen from Athens of 1000 B.C. were to appear suddenly among us, he or she would be among the brightest and most intellectually alive of our colleagues and companions, with a good memory, a broad range of ideas, and a clear-sighted view of important issues”.

Which can be said to be connected with today`s lack of straight thinking.

In this talk Dr. Michael Labossiere goes through a number of logical fallacies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies) -including some of what Aristotle called sophistical refutations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophistical_Refutations), e.g. fallacy of division (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division), begging the question (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question) and irrelevant conclusion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi).

MhhJAGjBIEw

[TargeT]

This used to be in my signature: (Learn to think! (http://www.triviumeducation.com/))

The Athens citizens were taught the Trivium and the Quadrivium, it is an ordered specific way of learning for very important reasons.. it is the BASIS of critical thought.

we are taught nearly the same subjects today, but purposefully in the wrong order (purposefully IMO, of course..) which causes confusion, miscommunication and a heavy reliance on logical fallacy.

[Sophocles]

Yes I agree. The correct order (from another thread -Gene Odening and Johan Oldenkamp - Self Education (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91540-Gene-Odening-and-Johan-Oldenkamp-Self-Education--Trivium-)):

GRAMMAR - LOGIC - RHETORIC - ARITHMETIC - GEOMETRY - MUSIC - ASTRONOMY

And an example of the wrong order is seen in the 1826 book (http://www.cedarcitylodge.org/books/Jeremy%20Cross%20-%20True%20Masonic%20Chart%20(1856)%20(254%20pgs).pdf) «The True Masonic Chart, or Hieroglyphic Monitor; containing all the emblems explained in the degrees of Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, Master Mason, Mark Master, Past Master, Most Excellent Master, Royal Arch, Royal Master, and Select Master: Designed and duly arranged agreeably to the lectures, by R. W. Jeremy L. Cross, G. L.» where the author lists the Seven Liberal Arts and Sciences in the following (wrong) order (p. 30):

GRAMMAR - RHETORIC - LOGIC - ARITHMETIC - GEOMETRY - MUSIC - ASTRONOMY

[Shannon]

This used to be in my signature: (Learn to think! (http://www.triviumeducation.com/))

The Athens citizens were taught the Trivium and the Quadrivium, it is an ordered specific way of learning for very important reasons.. it is the BASIS of critical thought.

we are taught nearly the same subjects today, but purposefully in the wrong order (purposefully IMO, of course..) which causes confusion, miscommunication and a heavy reliance on logical fallacy.

Ha! Before I read the thread and saw you post I was going to write, "target, paging avalon member target, we have a logical fallacy thread over in general"...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhUNrpX8Rx4

[norski]

Thank you, Sophocles, for an excellent post.

It would be nice if the court systems in the US applied more logic. The truth is that there is all kinds of fallacious reasoning that drives decision-making. The result of the OJ Simpson trial is a prime example of how emotion drives results. I was in law school when the jury delivered their verdict. Half the room cheered while the other half sat in silence. Sadly, the division was largely based on race.

One of my friends clerks for a judge in one of the largest circuit courts in my state. She told me once that people would be appalled at how decisions made by judges were driven by whether or not a judge had his cup of coffee for the day.

My husband, who is also in the legal profession, made an astute observation the other day. He said that justice was no longer being sought in the courtrooms. Instead, people are turning to Facebook and Twitter to air their grievances.

I'm afraid logical reasoning is quickly becoming a relic of the past.

[Sophocles]

Speaking of rhetoric, even though posted before this interview with Professor John Angus Campbell is relevant to the subject. It`s well worth listening to if interested in the topic.

Charles Darwin - "a rhetorical genius of the first order."

s_L3iN8NUQc

YT description:


Although Charles Darwin was an accomplished naturalist, Professor John Angus Campbell considers Darwin to be "a rhetorical genius of the first order." How else could the 1859 publication of The Origin of Species touch off a cultural and scientific revolution that is still being felt today?

In this illuminating interview, Professor Campbell breaks down Darwin's book chapter by chapter and reveals how Darwin was able to captivate the mind of the 19th Century intellectuals. With rhetorical brilliance Darwin made his case for natural selection with parallel illustrations from British domestic husbandry. He raises and answers a series of objections to his theory giving the impression that any challenge can be answered, even though he freely admits there are major obstacles to be overcome. By redefining terms, and carefully building on the prior beliefs of his audience, Darwin uses the Victorian belief in nature as designed to move his readers to question whether that design was intelligently directed. Darwin was particularly adept in enlisting his reader's imagination to smooth over or explain away the sometimes enormous gaps in his evidence.

Professor Campbell admits he was raised a Darwinist and that his first reading of The Origin of Species impressed upon him the great act of intellectual courage that Darwin displayed. But after a lifetime of studying Darwin's works in detail, Campbell states "I'm prepared to believe that Darwinism was an impressive artifact of 19th Century thought. It remains a permanent monument to the courage of the human intellect. However, I'm increasingly of the opinion that it may not be true."

John Angus Campbell is Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Communication at the University of Memphis and is a past President of the American Association for the Rhetoric of Science and Technology. He received his bachelor's degree from Portland State University (1964) and his Master's and Doctoral degrees in rhetoric from the University of Pittsburgh (1967,1968) and taught in the Department of Speech Communication at the University of Washington until 1995.

Dr. Campbell's research has focused on the rhetoric of science. He has published numerous technical articles analyzing the rhetorical strategy of Darwin's The Origin of Species and is widely regarded as the world's foremost expert on the subject.

Interview Questions:

What is your background and how did you develop an interest in the study of origins?

How was Darwin able to change the definition of design in nature for his 19th Century audience?

What were the major objections to Darwin's Origin of Species and how did he respond to them?

How have your views of Darwinian theory changed over the years?


He or she who masters (the) language and understands persuasion also decides people`s experiences and worldviews.

[amor]

Darwin left God, the original creator, laughing in stitches. You do not start in the middle of a hugely complex and balanced matter and hope to work out both ends from the middle without the mental power and insight of the Creator. In my view, Darwin and all those who follow him are ultimately fools.

[Sophocles]

This commercial gives a good example of how the art of rhetoric is being (ab)used today (re; ethos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethos) -pathos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathos)-logos (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos), and inventio (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventio)and elocutio (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elocutio)).

BzaHoU2kIwI

And if I am not mistaken, the enthymeme (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/enthymeme?s=ts) (which btw Aristotle labeled as "the rhetorical syllogism (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/syllogism)") here would be that...?



https://i.ytimg.com/vi/4nnaqx8-9Nk/hqdefault.jpg

This picture "suck" for itself, btw.


-------------------------


Added norwegian version:

UIIKJRQbPnY