deepstash
Beta
Iker T.
@ikert75
Our Cognitive Bias
People can be biased in many ways and jump into intuitive judgments that may not necessarily be correct. When we need to make a decision quickly, sometimes jumping into a conclusion with insufficient facts maybe the right way to go. Jumping into conclusions becomes problematic when it gets sub-optimal and leads to wrong decisions.
This is observed in the medical field(Premature Closure) and in cases of paranormal belief or witchcraft.
163 SAVES
289 READS
TOPICS IN THIS IDEA
RELATED ARTICLES & IDEAS
Elena X.
@elenxx444
The Argument from Incredulity: How People Explain What They Don't Understand
Basic structure of an argument from incredulity
Premise 1: I can’t explain or imagine how proposition X can be true.
Premise 2: if a certain proposition is true, then I must be able to explain or imagine how that can be.
It’s ok to be incredulous
... and to bring this up as part of an argument. The issue with doing so occurs when this incredulity isn’t justified or supported by concrete information, and when this lack of belief is used in order to assume that a preferred personal explanation must be the right one, despite the lack of proof.
At the same time, it’s also important to remember that it’s possible that the person using the argument from incredulity is right, despite the fact that their reasoning is flawed.
Counter the argument from incredulity
- Explain why this sort of reasoning is fallacious: namely the fact that your opponent’s inability to explain a certain phenomenon or to understand a certain theory, does not invalidate current explanations for it.
- Shift the burden of proof back to your opponent: ask them to support their initial assertion, and explain why they are incredulous, and why they think that this validates their position.
- If possible, you should show that there is scientific evidence that can be used in order to explain the phenomenon that’s being discussed.
James E.
@jam_iee52
Cherry Picking: When People Ignore Evidence that They Dislike
Cherry picking
It is a logical fallacy and it happens when we choose and focus only on evidence that supports our views and arguments while ignoring anything that may contradict us.
The problem with cherry picking
- It fails to take into consideration all the available information
- It presents information in a misleading way.
- It might lead to improper analysis and might cause someone to paint a misleading picture of a certain outcome.
The principle of total evidence
Also referred to as Bernoulli’s maxim, it states that, when assessing the probability that a certain hypothesis is true, we must take into account all the available information.
Evan Y.
@evan_yy15
Logical Fallacies: Begging the Question
Begging the question
Begging the question is an example of a fallacy of presumption, also known as a circular argument: The conclusion appears at the beginning and the end of the argument. ...
Begging the question example
"The law says you should drive on the right side of the road, and the law is the law."
When someone is questioning this statement, they are questioning the law. If we say, "because that is the law," we are begging the question. We are assuming the validity of what the other person is questioning.
Structure of circular reasoning
The most simple form of begging the question: A is true because A is true.
Circular reasoning can also be a bit longer:
- A is true because B is true, and B is true because A is true.
- A is true because B is true, and B is true because C is true. C is correct because A is true.
deepstash
helps you become inspired, wiser and productive, through bite-sized ideas from the best articles, books and videos out there.
Over 2M Installs
4.75 App Score
Deepstash is better on the app. Discover new ideas and get inspired daily.