MyAssignmentServices uses cookies to deliver the best experience possible. Read more

Portfolio of Critical Thinking Work

1. Arguments from Real Life

(a) Describe two arguments that use analogy that you have encountered in your studies or reading, or in conversation, or in the media or online. In each case, be sure to mention the argument’s conclusion, the analogy, and how the comparison (analogy) was being used to support the conclusion.

Solution

The first argument that I have encountered in the studies is about allowing children to choose the movies they want at this time. One side of the case states that allowing these children to choose the film they want, will result to them expecting to be able to select the schools, colleges, universities, and hospitals they want (Anttila, 2019). The other side of the argument argues that allowing the children to choose the movies they want at this time will enable them to make positive decisions in the future. The conclusion of was that the children are to be allowed to choose the movies they want at this time as it will enable them to enjoy their free time and cooperate well with their elders while at home.

The analogy, in this case, is that disallowing the children may result to hatred between the parent and the children which later can make the children take wrong life decisions and allowing them will give them freedom and feel a sense of belonging. The analogy helped the conclusion made as to the by stressing on the aim to avoid wrong decisions taken by the children as a result of choosing a movie they want. Moreover, children watch movies during free time, and it cannot affect the other choices concerning their education and health as their parents take full control and responsibility.

The second argument I have encountered is about whether to allow a student carry an authorization slip or stop the child from bringing the permission slip late. One side of the argument claims that if the child is allowed to take the approval slip evening, then there is no motive continually to set a limit for whatsoever once more. The other side argues that establishing a period is mandatory and should be embraced; letting a single child bring permission slip late cannot affect the whole program of an institution.

The argument's conclusion, in this case, is that deadline setting will prevail and the child will not be allowed to carry the acquiescence slip evening anymore unless there is a sensible purpose. The analogy, in this case, is how a single child who presents permission slip late to affect the whole programs of the institution. Setting deadline helps children to be alert and time conscious and therefore cannot be waved away. The comparison of letting the child bring the permission slip late and remove deadline, and stopping the child from bring the permission slip late and continue setting deadlines to help the conclusion as one chid cannot influence the whole process of an institution.

(b) Describe one fallacious argument by analogy that you have encountered in your reading, or in conversation, or in the media or advertising, or online—be sure to mention the analogy and the conclusion it was supposed to support. Which fallacy of analogy did it commit and why is it a fallacy? How seriously does the fallacy weaken the argument?

The argument I have encountered is about whether to break the diet and have one cookie per night, and then you will want to take ten cookies the following day before you notice, and you will gain back the fifteen pounds you lost. The analogy was that breaking the diet won't guarantee your appetite to adjust accordingly, and that breaking the food will not affect your health. The analogy here was to support the conclusion that it's not necessary that when you break your diet, then your appetite will change accordingly. It committed an appeal to probability fallacy as the argument believe that when you small amount of cookies today, you want more tomorrow (Sandow, 2019). It weakened the case by refuting the wrong belief of the initial claim.

(c) Describe an argument that uses an analogy, but which may be challenged by counter-analogy.

  • Be sure to mention the argument’s conclusion and the analogy being used to support it;

Allowing students to redo a test will result in them wanting to redo every assignment for the rest of the term. The conclusion is to let them repeat to push their scores higher, and the analogy to support it is that disallowing them will lead to high dropouts.

  • Explain how that analogy is meant to support the conclusion;

The analogy is meant to understand the fact that to redo a test is not enjoyment to the students but rather a boost to them.

  • Explain the counter-analogy that has been raised against the argument, and what the counter-analogy is intended to show. Is the counter-analogy a severe problem for the original argument?—Explain.

The counter-analogy here is that students can miss exams intentionally and request a redo to get enough time to prepare. The counter-analogy intends to show how students can take this opportunity for granted. It is a severe counter-analogy as it can influence the initial argument and change the conclusion altogether.

(d) Describe a real-life argument you have encountered in which problematic use of language results in a fallacy being committed.

  • What was the argument?

Finding enough people to volunteer to work at the shelter is not easy since the job is not paying.

  • What was problematic about the language it used?

The problematic is this argument is where an individual can expect higher payment while it’s a volunteer job.

What was the fallacy that resulted from this problematic language?

The fallacy here is that they believed working at the shelter will result in a reasonable payment from it.

2. Using the recommended detailed method for analysing and evaluating arguments that use analogy, first analyse and then evaluate the following argument. In your evaluation of the argument, mention and explain the relevance of any counter-considerations you think the argument should have addressed; and if you think any fallacy is committed, mention and explain it in your evaluation.

Although we may feel sympathetic toward refugees who try to enter Australia illegally, we must remember that Australia is like a lifeboat and its resources are limited, like the provisions in a lifeboat. People trying to enter Australia illegally are a serious risk to our nation, just as there is a serious risk to the occupants of a lifeboat if it is allowed to become overloaded. We should therefore turn away all who try to enter Australia illegally as refugees.

The argument claims that Australia is a lifeboat and that it should not allow too many people inside to avoid all associated risks. The conclusion is that Australia should turn away all who try to enter Australia unlawfully. The argument should have considered the problem of refugees and refute the initial appeal to probability fallacy all who seek to enter Australia unlawful have bad intentions (Welsman, 2019). Through considering this counter-consideration, Australia could set appropriate measures to identify risky individuals and refugees. The fallacy resulted in the wrong conclusion made in this argument.

3. Definitions

For each of the following passages, identify the type of description being used, say whether the definition is acceptable or unacceptable, and justify your answer.

(i) You and I are not really disagreeing. Each of us does say the other is wrong, but at least we’re still talking to each other.

Acceptable, it is satisfactory and has all the requirements for an adequate definition such as clarity and simplicity.

(ii) Universities are institutions of tertiary education.

Unacceptable, it is unsatisfactory as it lacks clarity, not all who learn in universities pursue tertiary education.

(iii) The winner of this relay race will be the team that completes the most significant number of laps of the track in one hour.

Acceptable, it is satisfactory and has all qualities such as transparency and straightforwardness.

4. Problematic Uses of Language

(i) From the options below, select the one which correctly describes the following passage:

‘We shouldn’t worry about tsunamis; after all, they’re just waves.’

a) This statement does not involve any problematic use of language.

b) This statement is problematic because it is vague.

c) This statement is problematic because it is ambiguous.

d) This statement is problematic because it uses emotionally charged language

e) This statement is problematic because it uses euphemism

I select (f) This statement is problematic because it uses emotionally charged language

(ii) From the options below, select the one which correctly describes the following passage:

‘Because it’s nothing but a theory, the theory of relativity should not be taken seriously.’

a) This statement does not involve any problematic use of language.

b) This statement is problematic because of vagueness.

c) This statement is problematic because of ambiguity.

d) This statement is problematic because it uses emotionally charged language.

e) This statement is problematic because it uses euphemism.

I select (c). This statement is problematic because of ambiguity.

(iii) From the options below, select the one which correctly describes the following passage:

‘Excessive use of the photocopier is not permitted.’

a) This statement does not use any problematic language.

b) This statement is ambiguous.

c) This statement is vague.

d) This statement is too emotional.

e) This statement relies on euphemism.

I select (a). This statement is ambiguous

Reference

Anttila, R. (2019). Analogy (Vol. 10). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.

Sandow, E. (2019). Til work do us part: the social fallacy of long-distance commuting. In Integrating Gender into Transport Planning (pp. 121-144). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Welsman, J., & Armstrong, N. (2019). Interpreting aerobic fitness in youth: the fallacy of ratio scaling. Pediatric exercise science, 31(2), 184-190.

Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Philosophy Assignment Help

Get It Done! Today

Applicable Time Zone is AEST [Sydney, NSW] (GMT+11)
Not Specific >5000
  • 1,212,718Orders

  • 4.9/5Rating

  • 5,063Experts

Highlights

  • 21 Step Quality Check
  • 2000+ Ph.D Experts
  • Live Expert Sessions
  • Dedicated App
  • Earn while you Learn with us
  • Confidentiality Agreement
  • Money Back Guarantee
  • Customer Feedback

Just Pay for your Assignment

  • Turnitin Report

    $10.00
  • Proofreading and Editing

    $9.00Per Page
  • Consultation with Expert

    $35.00Per Hour
  • Live Session 1-on-1

    $40.00Per 30 min.
  • Quality Check

    $25.00
  • Total

    Free
  • Let's Start

Get
500 Words Free
on your assignment today

Browse across 1 Million Assignment Samples for Free

Explore MASS
Order Now

Request Callback

My Assignment Services- Whatsapp Tap to ChatGet instant assignment help

Hire Certified Experts
Ask your Question
Need Assistance on your
existing assignment order?