A test
Judging by the most recent communications that we have received
from Afghanistan in the form of encrypted cables, as well as by
telephone conferences... the situation in Afghanistan has
deteriorated sharply. There, as we know from the previous
cables, [a division of the army] was stationed, and had restored
order, but now we have received news that this division has
essentially collapsed. An artillery regiment and one infantry
regiment comprising that division have gone over to the
insurgents. Bands of saboteurs and terrorists, having infiltrated
from the territory of Pakistan, trained and armed not only with
the participation of Pakistani forces but also of [a foreign power]
are committing atrocities.. The insurgents infiltrating into the
territory... from Pakistan and Iran have joined forces with
domestic [resistance]. The latter is especially comprised of
religious fanatics. The number of insurgents is difficult to
determine, but our [commanders] tell us that they are
thousands, literally thousands.
• Soviet General named Gromyko
reporting to L.I. Breshnev on March 17,
1979.
in 1983, a Soviet journalist named Vladimir
Danchev referred, on air, to the Soviet actions
in Afghanistan as an 'invasion'. The
Communist party preferred the term
'liberation', as Breshnev had pointed out, it
can't be an invasion if the forces had been
'invited' in by the Government to help fight the
terrorist, saboteurs and religious fanatics.
Vladimir Danchev had the courage to call an
invasion an 'invasion', and for that, the
Soviets took him away to be 'cured' of his
'illness'.
Oddities, Fallacies, and other
bad arguments:
• Analogies
• Enthymemes
– Example
– Authority
– Maxims
• Miscellaneous Fallacies
Analogy
1)Anti-miscegenation laws were
discriminatory
2)anti-miscegenation and anti-gay
marriage laws are alike because:
Anti-miscegenation
laws were
supported via a
'defense of
traditional
marriage'.
Anti-gay marriage
laws are supported
via a 'defense of
traditional
marriage'.
Therefore:
• Anti-gay marriage laws are
discriminatory.
Enthymemes
• small change (12:32:26 p.m.)
– Nope , I was a limited resource before the market
and now I am not sure that any market activity is a
good idea. I am considering investing in a fireproof
mattress and hoarding gold.
• Dan Seiver (12:34:33 p.m.)
– It is always darkest before the dawn!
• ajw (12:36:11 p.m.)
– So, do you think we're close to a "dawn"?
• Dan Seiver (12:36:56 p.m.)
– getting close!!!
My favorite example in the
entire semester:
Now, I am terrible when it comes to guys. I think he's
interested in me, but it seems like once we have a
connection, we both back off and kind of freak out.
I really want something to happen, but I don't
know a) if he's interested in the first place, or b)
how to let him know I'm interested without making
the work environment weird. (Someone mentioned
another woman here who was interested in him,
and his response was, "You don't shit where you
eat.") Am I crazy? Should I back off and see if he
pursues me? Should I make my intentions known?
What the hell?
How is 'don't shit where you eat' supposed
to constitute an argument?
A deduction dealing with practical subjects.
(S21, Rhetoric)
But, for the most part, we mean:
An enthymeme is an argument that has
one or more premises implied or
assumed, not mentioned explicitly.
Enthymemes and Analogies:
Examples
Enthymemes, Authority and
Analogies: Examples
• EJ Dionne ‘Conservative’
• Stalin and Bin Laden
• The Nazis and Everyone
Example
• An argument from example is any
incomplete argument, or enthymeme,
that references a event, past, present or
fictional, to make the case. The event is
not used as data point in an inductive
argument to establish a general
conclusion, or as an analogy pre se. It is
used as a kind of illustrative case or
paradigmatic example for the current
situation.
Authority
• Pat Robertson
• Dr. Phil
• Etc...
One produces an argument from authority
if the only reason given in support of a
conclusion is the endorsement of a
putative authority in the field.
Other Character-based
persuasions
• “Help, Mom, there are liberals under the
bed!”
• “Why Mommy is a democrat”
• http://www.brawnyman.com/products/ad
s.html
• And:
http://www.brawnyman.com/innocentesc
apes/indexbroadband.html
Attack it here
Arguments from Analogy
1. A and B are alike with respect to {a, b, c
…}
2. A has property x.
3. Therefore, B likely has property x.
Either that {a, b, c…} are not
relevant to having x – or that B
does not share {a, b, c…} with
A.
When animal models go bad:
Cont’d
"Once we understand the biology of
Escherichia coli, we will understand
the biology of an elephant".
Jacques Monod.
Modeling
• Models (of all sorts, but particularly
animal models) are analogies – so are
we to discard all animal
experimentation?
Animal Model hall of fame:
The Thalidomide Tragedy
• Thalidomide is a anti-inflammatory and
immunosuppressant that was prescribed to
expectant mothers in the 1950s
• Thalidomide is a teratogen in a few rabbit
breeds and in seven species of primates.
• It is not a teratogen in at lest 10 rat strains, 15
mice strains, 11 rabbit breeds, two dog
breeds, three hamster strains, and eight
species of primate.
In reverse:
• Aspirin, insulin, epinephrine, and certain
antibiotics (I don’t know which) are
known to cause malformations in
rodents
Argument from analogy
• A and B are alike with respect to
properties {a, b, c…}
• A has property x
• Therefore, B should have property x as
well.
Argument from model:
• A and B are functionally isomorphic with
respect to properties {1, 2, 3…}
• A has the functional property n
• Functional isomorphism usually betrays
similar underlying structures.
• Therefore, B should have functional
property n as well.
Argument from model:
• A and B are functionally isomorphic with
respect to properties {a, b, c…}
• A has the functional property x
• Functional isomorphism usually betrays
similar mechanism.
• Therefore, B should have functional
property x as well.
A Question:
• Is the Thalidomide story a case of
pseudo-science, or just science done
badly?
• Is this evidence that animal models are
unreliable, or is it just that these studies
were poorly performed?
Problems for Many Sciences.
• How do we observe / experiment on the
internal workings of something (I.e.
cognition)?
Sternberg’s Experiment
Sternberg’s Results
Response Time = 398+38(S)
Gravitational Force =
(A constant called G) x (mass of first object) x
(mass of second object)
(the square of the distance between them)
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mechanism
Models & Mechanisms:
• Mechanism: entities and activities
organized to produce a phenomenon
(teleological?)
• Entities and activities organized in such
a way as to realize a functional role.
‘Model’?
• A Model is a description of some
phenomena / on
A model is verdical insofar as corresponds to
the actual phenomena it seeks to model. (‘fit’)
A model, just like a ‘law’ or a ‘theory’ explains
phenomena / on and can be used to make
predictions about novel / unobserved aspects
of the phenomena it seeks to model.
Therefore, it is plays the same roll as ‘law’ or
‘theory’ in the H-D method or D-N model of
explanation.
Models
Modeling
Formulae
relating
observables
‘Mathematical
Models’ in Psych
V = d/t
Investigation of
underlying
structure
Discovered Models
‘Experimental
Systems’
Invented Models
Mathematical
Symbolic
Neural Network
F=ma
Categorization of different Models
/ Systems:
1st use: relating observables
• The most simple use of a mathematical
model is to fit a mathematical function to
some data collected in an experiment. That
function can then be used to make
predictions about novel or unobserved
behavior.
• Sternberg’s Memory Scanning Model
– Response Time = 398 + 38(Memory Set Size)
• De Castro and Brewer
– Intake of food = s(Number of People Present)0.22
Sternberg’s Results
Response Time = 398+38(S)
Intake = s(People)0.22
Gravitational Force =
(A constant called G) x (m1) x (m2)
(d2)
The importance of Mathematical
Models:
Quick: what is the most
famous mathematical model
in the US right now?
The BCS Formula
• ‘Fit’?
• Data: team record, opponent’s record
(‘strength of schedule’), poll rankings
over the season, team losses & ‘quality
wins’.
Example: Oklahoma 2000?
• AP & Coaches poll end of season rank = 1.
• Average rank over the course of the season=
1.86.
• Average of AP & Coaches poll + average over
season = 2.86.
• (Thanks to Richard Billingsley at ESPN for
the explanation).
Strength of schedule
• Add the opponent’s records together =
73 Wins, 62 losses.
• Drop wins against teams that were not
1-A, and you have 70W.
• Drop losses from opponent’s schedule
that were against OK, and you get 50
losses.
• Total: 70 Wins, 50 losses.
Opponent’s winning %.
• The winning percentage is 70/120 = 58.3% or
0.583.
• 0.583 * 2/3 = 0.3889
• Do the same ‘opponent’ calculation for each
of the opponent’s opponents and weight it by
1/3 = 0.1749
• Add these 2 together and you get 0.5638
Now…
• Rank all the teams according to this ‘strength
of schedule’. OK is 11th
• Finally, take that rank / 25 = 0.44.
• Add ‘Team losses’ (0 for OK) and ‘Quality
wins’ (0 for OK).
• Add that to ‘Poll average’ and you get 3.30.
New BCS:
•
I. Harris Interactive Poll (1/3rd)
Replaces the AP Poll. The first poll will be released
September 25, then weekly through December 4. A
team's score in the Harris poll will be divided by
2,825, which is the maximum number of points any
team can receive if all 113 voting members rank the
same team as Number 1. (Example: 2,825 / 2,825 =
1.0. If a team receives a total of 113 voting points, an
average of 25th place, their BCS quotient of this
component would be .04. (1.0 / 25 = 0.04).
New BCS:
•
II. Coaches Poll (1/3rd)
A team's score in the USA Today poll will be divided by 1,550, which is
the maximum number of points any team can receive if all 62 voting
members rank the same team as Number 1. (Example: 1,550 / 1,550 =
1.0. If a team receives a total of 62 voting points, an average of 25th
place, their BCS quotient of this component would be .04. (1.0 / 25 =
0.04.)
(Better understanding the polls: In both human polls, voting
members fill out their own top 25 rankings ballot. Each team receives 125 points in reverse order of the way they are ranked. The 25th place
team on each ballot receives 1 point, 24th place gets 2 points, 23rd
receives 3 points... first place receives 25 points.)
New BCS:
•
III. Computer rankings (1/3rd)
Six computer ranking systems will participate. The
highest and lowest rating of each team will be thrown
out and the remaining four will be averaged. The
current participating computer rankings are:
Peter Wolfe
Wes Colley
Sagarin
Seattle Times
Richard Billingsley
Kenneth Massey
New BCS:
•
A = Harris Poll
B = Coaches Poll
C = Throw out the high and low of the six
computer rankings for each team. Add the
remaining four. Divide that total by four.
Result: A+B+C = Total Score
(thanks to collegefootballpoll.com for the
explanation)
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_standings.
html
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_explained.
html
‘Mathematical’?
– Obvious: algebra / calculus
– Recursive functions
– Game Theory
• Other kinds of models
– Physical (geology)
– Virtual
• Neural Network
• Symbolic
– Animal
• In Vitro
• In vivo
Scientific Reasoning
Conclusion
If I’m right that the main structure of explanation
in scientific inquiry is the investigation of
underlying mechanisms, then…
1. Correlational / observational studies are
primarily used for establishing the parameters of
the mechanism’s behavior.
2. Modeling is a fundamental, essential part of
scientific activity.
3. Models serve the same roll in scientific inquiry
as Popper’s ‘laws’ – they entail falsifiable
predictions.
4. The line between science & pseudoscience is
more clear:
Psychology v. Astrology
Phenomenon explained /
predicted: human behavior
and personality.
Mechanism: beliefs and
desires interact to
determine human
behavior, which beliefs
and desires get
precedence in any one
choice is influenced by the
hodge-podge of previous
experiences and genetic
dispositions we call
‘personality’.
Phenomenon
explained / predicted:
human behavior and
personality.
Mechanism: the forces
of the planets at time
of birth.
Biology v. Creation Science
Phenomenon to be
explained: Variation of
species over time and
space.
Mechanism: Natural
Selection (random
mutations are replicated if
they help the creature
reproduce by (a)
increasing survival in the
environment (b) changing
the number of offspring
the creature has or (c)
increasing the chances
that that will creature
Phenomenon to be
explained: Variation of
species over time and
space.
Mechanism: ?
Evaluating Competing
Mechanisms
Ptolemaic Astronomy
Copernican Astronomy
Phenomenon:
Phenomenon:
Parameters:
Fit the location of the planets & stars in
the sky
(They’re equal on this one)
“Other” External Values:
The Copernican system is far simpler and
more elegant.
Venus
Venus
Galileo deduced that:
If the Ptolemaic system is correct, then
Venus should not show phases. And
If the Copernican system is correct, the
Venus should show phases.
Venus shows phases.
Therefore, the Ptolemaic system is not
correct.
REVOLUTION!
‘Real’ Revolutions as
metaphor.
• Scientific Revolutions are those ‘noncumulative developmental episodes in
which an older paradigm is replaced in
whole or in part by an incompatible one’
Thomas Kuhn The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions
Analogical points:
1. Revolutions are inaugurated by a
‘growing sense, often restricted to a
segment of the political community,
that existing institutions have ceased
to adequately meet the problems
posed by an environment that they
have in part created’
2.Revolutions often seem revolutionary
only to those whose paradigms are
affected to them.
3. Success of a revolution necessitates, in
part, the ‘relinquishment of one set of
institutions in favor of another, an in the
interim, society is not governed by
institutions at all.’
Conclusion:
• Well, that’s the point:
– During revolutions, society is divided into
competing camps or parties – one seeking
to defend the old, others seeking to replace
it with new.
– (There may be competing new camps as
well)
– Once that kind of polarization occurs,
political recourse fails.
• The parties are fighting over the legitimacy of
institutions by which political decisions can be
made – for that very reason, there is no
political mechanism for adjudicating between
the parties.
• So, the parties must ‘take to the streets’ –
appeal to something other than political will
(such as God, history, etc) or resort to force.
• The success of the winner is
determined not by political institutions,
but by extrapolitical institutions – by the
very fact that they replace those
institutions by which they legitimize
themselves.
Therefore, by analogy…
• Scientific revolutions gain legitimacy not
by factors internal to science, but by
extra-scientific methods, such as social
factors. And this is precisely because
the issue at stake is the legitimacy of
factors internal to science.
Some analogies are just better
than others
1) How many properties are, in fact,
shared between the target and the
analogical organism?
2) Are the shared properties relevant to the
predicated property (conclusion)?
3) How varied are the instances used in
the analogical case? (i.e. the problem
with Thalydomide studies)
Fallacies:
• Hasty analogy (too few properties)
• Irrelevant analogy (properties not
relevant)
• Shallow analogy (no robust data
available)
Attacking Authority?
• You know this already: it's all about trust
– and we undermine trust just like we
undermine character: attack the
motivations, the public biography, the
qualifications, etc.
Example
In early 2005, it was revealed that the
Bush administration had paid Armstrong
Williams, a conservative commentator
and columnist $241,000 to promote their
"No Child Left Behind" act in his
newspaper columns and appearances on
the talk shows.
Is Mr. Williams a legitimate authority on the
subject of educational policy?
Fundamentalism
The site you are about to enter contains
the Gospel truth on an important, hotbutton issue. This Gospel truth includes,
but is not limited to: Sodomy is an
abominable sin, worthy of death. "If a
man also lie with mankind..." Godhatesfags.com
Warning!!! To God's Elect: Leave Sweden NoW!!! "And I head
another voice from heaven, saying, come out of her my people,
that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her
plagues." Rev. 18:4
... Sweden's doom is no irreversible! With the imprisonment of Ake
Green, Swedes have allowed the filthy sodomite agenda to be
completely fulfilled.. With this act, Sweden has drawn to it the
wrath and mocking of God! "I also will laugh at your calamity; I will
mock when your fear cometh; When your fear cometh as
desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when
distress and anguish cometh upon you...
THANK GOD FOR ALL DEAD SWEDES!!!
... Unconfirmed numbers of Swedes are dead as a result of the
tsunamis which ravaged Thailand and the other lush resorts of
that region, and thousands more are unaccounted for, either still
rotting in the tropical conditions or buried, as they deserve, as
asses in mass graves (see Jeremiah 22:19). Scarcely a family in
Sweden has been untouched by the devastation. Bible preachers
say, THANK GOD for it all!
The living GOD that created us made us to
be two halves of a whole, male and
female (it was Adam and Even, not Adam
and Steve). Scripture says that
homosexuality is an abomination before
GOD...
Quick history of the movement
• In 1920, a journalist and Baptist layman
named Curtis Lee Laws appropriated the
term 'fundamentalist' as a designation for
those who were ready "to do battle royal
for the Fundamentals."
(http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.ed
u/nrms/fund.html)
1925: Daily Mail 24 May 8: Mr. William
Jennings Bryan... has been exerting the
full force of his great eloquence in a
campaign on behalf of what is termed
'Fundamentalism'. (OED)
1922 Contemp. Rev. July 20 The
fundamentalist creed. Ibid. 21 The
Fundamentalists have been fortunate in
their non-ministerial leader [sc. W. J.
Bryan].
Basic theses:
• A commitment to a particular text as the
authority in all matters, and the belief that
their interpretation of that text is literal,
that is, uninterpreted.
• A rejection of all other forms of
reasoning and knowledge formation,
especially empirical science.
• The use of violent language and imagery,
especially when talking about those who
reject their interpretation.
Another Form of authority: ‘folk’
wisdom
• We have a saying in the United States, it's a
saying that "friends don't let friends drive drunk".
Ladies and gentlemen, we have an alcoholic at
the wheel of American foreign policy, named
George W. Bush, and we the people of the United
States of America need your assistance to reach
in, grab the keys from the ignition and say no, we
will not allow you to drive the vehicle of
international peace and security over the cliff of
war. Thank you very much for being here today.
Thank you.
– Scott Rider, UN Weapons inspector, Hyde Park
Corner
Maxims
1)Friends don't let friends drive drunk
2)Bush is drunk, and the President 'drives'
the country.
3)England is a friend of the US.
4)Therefore, England shouldn't let Bush
drive the US.
Question: Will the US administration manage to forget
our disagreements? As soon as the war began, you,
Mr. Vershbow, hinted that America might make some
decisions not in favor of Russia.
Vershbow: Of course, the harshness of our
disagreements, especially in the course of the last
debates in the UN, caused strong displeasure among
Americans. One of instances of this displeasure was
the draft law aimed at punishing Russian companies
by excluding them from the process of restoration of
Iraq. However, the US administration has not
supported this draft law.
We have a saying: "It takes two to tango." We need to
give up ideological arguments and start practical
There is no part of the means placed in the hands of
the Executive which might be used with greater effect
for unhallowed purposes than the control of the public
press. The maxim which our ancestors derived from
the mother country that "the freedom of the press is
the great bulwark of civil and religious liberty" is one of
the most precious legacies which they have left us. We
have learned, too, from our own as well as the
experience of other countries, that golden shackles, by
whomsoever or by whatever pretense imposed, are as
fatal to it as the iron bonds of despotism. The presses
in the necessary employment of the Government
should never be used "to clear the guilty or to varnish
crime." A decent and manly examination of the acts of
the Government should be not only tolerated, but
encouraged.
• Inaugural Address of William Henry Harrison
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1841
• When two elephants fight... Nigeria, “the
grass,” suffers: An editorial in "KWENU",
a Nigerian web site. In this case, the
elephants are the US and the UK. The
grass is Nigeria.
• Medicine for Dry Bone: A sermon from a
United Methodist minister, reprinted on a
Christian inspirational web site. In this
case, the elephants are parents, and the
grass is their children.
• Armed Conflict and Environment - Enviro Fact
Sheet 24: A 'fact sheet' distributed by the South
African grocery store chain 'Pick and Pay'. In this
case, the elephants are the two sides in a number
of armed conflicts in Africa, and the grass is the
environment.
• The $200 million disinformation campaign: Social
Security privatization cabal will break the bank to
convince you to break yourself. An editorial on
'WorkingForChange.com', the publication of
Working Assets Long Distance, a telecom
company that donates its profits to progressive
causes. In this case, the elephants are the two
sides are trial lawyers and big business, the grass
Fallacies of Relevance
Classified
•
•
•
•
•
ad hominems
Appeals to Authority
Appeals to Emotion
Non Sequetors
Red Herrings
ad hominems Classified
• ad hominems
– ad hominem (basic) = irrelevant personal information
• Abusive / Humiliation: The funniest ad hominem in the history of
Televised debates.
• Circumstantial (Of course you support tax cuts, you’re wealthy)
– Common Abusive forms:
• Poisoning the well = preemptive attack
• ‘Genetic’ fallacy = attacking the origin of the idea (the idea’s
history), not the idea itself
• Guilt by association = attacking an idea because of those who
have held it in the past
– To Quoque = “You too”
• inconsistency
Abusive
• Abusive ad hominems
QUAYLE: I have as much experience in the Congress
as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency.
I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush
administration, if that unfortunate event would ever
occur.
WOODRUFF: Senator Bentsen.
BENTSEN: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew
Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine.
Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy. (Prolonged
shouts and applause)
Circumstantial
• Circumstances = the circumstances of
the individual attacked, instead of their
argument
– Note: There are ‘good’ cases of this – I.e.
self-interest. Think of Enron, or Haliburton
Appeal to Money
• Equating cost (or lack thereof) w/ value
– That’s expensive, therefore it is good.
– (Linux): It’s free, therefore it must suck.
– Anyone seen that ad for Focusyn (?) where
the woman says “The let you try it free – it
must be good!”
Appeal to Age / Novelty
• Equating youth (the latest) w/ value
– It’s new (young) therefore, it must be good
– Netscape 7
Poisoning the well
• “There he goes again”
• “My opponent is going to propose lots of
big new social programs”
• “Let me introduce the next guest. An
columnist known for her wildly liberal
views…”
‘Genetic’ Fallacy
• Atheists often have difficult relationships with
their fathers. That’s why they can’t accept the
truth of the Heavenly father.
• Careful: History does tell us important things,
and many, many people who make
arguments seem totally unaware of history
(I.e. the people who wrote The Bell Curve, but
Gould will make that point for me).
To Quoque
• Explicit: “How can you call me … when you
… all the time!” (Flip-flopper?)
• Subtle: Attacking consistency: How can you
call your self a vegetarian, when you would
accept life-saving drugs that were tested on
animals!
• Related: What you would do, given the
chance. “Make no mistake, he would do the
same thing to me if he could!”
• "Rich hire lawyers and accountants for
a reason — to stick you with the bill.
We’re not going to let him tax you,
because we’re going to win…" Bush:
(quoted in EJ Dionne's column,
Washington Post September 24, 2004).
Inconsistency
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin
of little minds
– Ralph Waldo Emerson ‘self-reliance’
Emerson
The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency; a reverence for our
past act or word because the eyes of others have no other data for computing
our orbit than our past acts, and we are loath to disappoint them.
But why should you keep your head over your shoulder? Why drag about this
corpse of your memory, lest you contradict somewhat you have stated in this or
that public place? Suppose you should contradict yourself; what then? It seems
to be a rule of wisdom never to rely on your memory alone, scarcely even in acts
of pure memory, but to bring the past for judgment into the thousand-eyed
present, and live ever in a new day. In your metaphysics you have denied
personality to the Deity, yet when the devout motions of the soul come, yield to
them heart and life though they should clothe God with shape and color. Leave
your theory, as Joseph his coat in the hand of the harlot, and flee.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and
philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to
do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what
you think now in hard words and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard
words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.--"Ah, so you shall
be sure to be misunderstood."--Is it so bad then to be misunderstood?
Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and
Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever
took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.
Recent
• 'John Kerry and the liberals in congress'
• Bush PFA 02
• NARAL's ad on John Roberts (video)
Non Sequetor
Red Herring
Guilt by association
• Hilter cited Nietzsche in Mien Campf.
• Therefore, Nietzsche is dangerous.
• An Anarchist assassinated W. McKinley
in 1908 (?), and Anarchists started the
Hay Market Sq. Riot in 1889.
Therefore, all anarchists are bombthrowing, gun-toting lunatics.