Critical Thinking

Your assignment for this unit involves identifying fallacies, conclusions, and premises as well as correcting fallacies.

Using the

Unit V Assignment Template

, review the dialogue (short conversation) between three people. Identify four fallacies, along with the four premises and conclusions leading up to the fallacies identified. In the first column, identify the fallacy present. In the second column, identify the conclusion of the fallacious argument, and in the third column identify the premises, or the reasons offered for the conclusion. In the last column, propose some ways to counter this fallacy. You should have a total of four fallacies, four conclusions, four premises, and four counters to correct the fallacies. All fallacies must come from Chapter 8 of our textbook. 

View the

Unit V Sample Dialogue and Template

for an example of how your completed assignment should look. APA Style will not be required for this assignment, and no outside resources are required.

Unit V Sample Dialogue and Template

Joshua:  Tony has ordered way more cheese than we need for this week! Again!

Maria: Oh! 

Frank: That’s not good!

Joshua: I propose we point out to him that just because this restaurant has been ordering 300 pounds of cheese a week, does not mean that we should continue doing so. He claims that he is ordering 300 pounds of cheese a week because it has been done for 30 years since his father opened the restaurant. It is basically a tradition (Appeal to tradition). Tony is a good listener. I think he listens to us, and he really cares about what we think. I am going to point out to him that just because something is tradition, it does not mean it is good for our restaurant. Now, here is what I am proposing. I have a friend who is a quantum physics professor. He has studied for a long time. He is the smartest guy I know. I told him about our problem with having too much cheese. He thinks we should not order cheese at all. He thinks dairy is overall unhealthy. I think he may be on a vegan diet or something like that. He thinks we may be able to get our customers to start ordering food without cheese at all. Since he has a PhD in quantum physics, I really value his opinion, and I think that he is right (Appeal to irrelevant authority). 

Maria: What!? No cheese at all? That’s crazy!

Frank: Joshua, Maria is right. We have way too many tasty items with cheese that sell really well. Our grilled cheese sandwiches are amazing, and people just love our quesadillas. Besides, it sounds like your friend is an expert or authority in quantum physics and has no expertise in the restaurant management business. I think you should stick to your original plan and just ask Tony to order less cheese from now on.

Maria: I agree. Besides, you said Tony will listen to us. It looks, however, like we have another problem. The other manager, Sophia, has claimed we should start ordering the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces, but did you know that her husband, Tomasso Lorenzo, owns that company? The Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces company? She is just claiming that we should order that specific brand because her family will benefit from the sales. We should not order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces brand (Circumstancial ad hominem). 

Joshua: I am always careful when listening to Sophia. I don’t think she makes good decisions, and she tends to lie a lot. She also has a history of bad financial credit and never finished college. Thus, we should not order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces (Abusive ad hominem
).

Frank: Hold on y’all. I don’t think we are thinking very clearly here…

Maria: Yes, Joshua, do you realize that what you have said about Sophia is not really logically relevant to whether we should order the Lorenzo brand garlic sauce? You have attacked her personally about her credit and allegedly lying a lot. I have never had an experience where she has lied to me.

Joshua: Point well taken! But Maria, there also seems to be a flaw in your argument as well. You said her family will benefit from the sales. You are factually correct, but is this relevant to the conclusion that we should not order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces? What if the Lorenzo brand is tasty and a big hit with our customers? It just doesn’t seem logically relevant to conclude that we should not order that brand based on the fact that her husband owns the company.

Maria: OK. I see what you mean, and I agree.

Frank: Well, it looks like we are thinking clearly about our ordering decisions! But, what are we going to do about our advertising problem? Last time we went on an advertisement campaign, our business went through the roof!

Joshua: Well we either advertise or perish! So…we should definitely advertise (False Dilemma).

Maria: I don’t think it is an either-or type of situation. It is possible that our business can continue to grow without advertising. It is also possible that we can perish for reasons that have nothing to do with advertising.

Joshua: OK…very good point.

Frank: Well….let’s brainstorm for a moment. Last time we advertised, we used those fancy pamphlets with that smooth paper that we printed out at the corner print shop. I bet using that fancy smooth paper caused the high number of customers we had that summer (Correlation is not causation).

Maria: Hmmmmm….are you sure that it was the kind of paper that caused the increase in customers? I mean, what was written on the paper and the pictures of our wonderful dishes probably had more to do with it.

Frank: That’s a good point. Let’s make sure that we have really good pictures of our dishes.

Fallacy:

Conclusion:

Premise(s):

How it is corrected:

Appeal to tradition (Tony’s argument)

We should order 300 pounds of cheese a week.

It is tradition to order 300 pounds of cheese a week

I am going to point out to him that just because something is tradition, it does not mean that it is good for our restaurant.

Appeal to irrelevant authority 
(Joshua’s argument)

The restaurant should not order any cheese at all.

My quantum physics professor friend thinks we should not order any cheese.

It sounds like your friend is an expert or authority in quantum physics and has no expertise in the restaurant management business.  

Circumstantial ad hominem
(Maria’s argument)

We should not order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces brand 

Sophia is claiming that we should order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces
brand. Sophia’s husband owns the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces company. Sophia is claiming that we should order that specific brand because her family will benefit from the sales. 

“You are factually correct but is this relevant to the conclusion that we should not order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces? What if the Lorenzo brand is tasty and a big hit with our customers? It just doesn’t seem logically relevant to conclude that we should not order that brand based on the fact that her husband owns the company” 

Abusive ad hominem 
(Joshua’s argument)

We should not order the Lorenzo Creamy Garlic Sauces

Sophia does not make good decisions and she tends to lie a lot. She also has a history of bad financial credit and never finished college.

“do you realize that what you have said about Sophia is not really logically relevant to whether we should order the Lorenzo brand garlic sauce? You have attacked her personally about her credit and allegedly lying a lot.”

False Dilemma
(Joshua’s argument)

We should advertise

We either advertise or perish

I don’t think it is an either/or type of situation. It is possible that our business can continue to grow without advertising. It is also possible that we can perish for reasons that have nothing to do with advertising.

Correlation is not causation
(Frank’s argument)

The fancy pamphlets with smooth paper caused a high increase in customers

We used fancy pamphlets with smooth paper

“Are you sure that it was the kind of paper that caused the increase in customers? I mean, what was written on the paper and the pictures of our wonderful dishes probably had more to do with it.”

Unit V Assignment Template

Dialogue:

Timothy: We had another rough week with our fundraising efforts. It seems like no one wants to contribute to our non-profit. We will either have to close down our non-profit or increase our fundraising efforts significantly. Since we are not significantly increasing our fundraising, we will have to close down our non-profit. 

Felicia: Yeah, things are not looking good for us, but Timothy, I am not sure that this is an either-or situation. There are other possibilities besides the two that you presented. It is possible, for example, that we can increase our fundraising a little more (and thus not significantly) without having to completely close down our wonderful tutoring non-profit. We just need enough money to continue to pay our tutors who are doing a great job in offering tutoring to students who cannot afford expensive math and science tutoring. 

Amanda: That’s true, Felicia, but we need some smart fundraising ideas. I think advertising our fundraising dinners on social media sites is a good idea. We should advertise on those sites. It is a good idea because millions of companies are advertising on social media sites.

Felicia: Amanda, you are absolutely right! Advertising our fundraising dinners on social media sites is a good idea, but it is not a good idea because it is popular. Sometimes, things that are popular are not necessarily good. 

Timothy: That sounds great! Does anyone have any other ideas? 

Amanda: Well…for 30 years now we have advertised in our local newspaper. It has been a strong tradition since our founder, Jason Smith, started Smith Tutoring 40 years ago. Since it has been a tradition, I think we should keep advertising in our local newspaper.

Felicia: I disagree, Amanda. Just because something is tradition does not mean it is good. Besides, people do not buy the newspaper as much as they used to, and that is because of the internet. Our local newspaper has seen a significant drop in readership. 

Amanda: I see your point Amanda. How about this? How about we go to the advertising firm that is right next door, Smart Ads. They are a very successful advertising company as a whole. I have seen their ads. Since they are a great advertising company as whole, I bet their individual employees are also great. We can go in there first thing tomorrow and talk to one of their employees because they will be phenomenal.

Timothy: That sounds like a great idea! It might not be the case that every employee is great just because the company is great. What is good about a group is not also good about the individual member of that group, but I think we should definitely go and talk to someone there.

Amanda: Sounds good to me! 

Felicia: Me too! 

Fallacy:

Conclusion:

Premise(s):

How it is corrected: