One concept from our readings that I found useful and interesting was vague generalities. This concept was discussed in Chapter 8 of our “Critical Thinking” textbook. Vague generalities are made when a precise number is not specified. Certain key words used in vague generalities are; all, many, most, a lot, some, a few, and very few. Our textbook points out that it is possible for us to analyze whether arguments using the ambiguous words, “all” and “some” are valid. There are two vague generalities that we can use in strong arguments, “almost all” and “very few”. An example would be; “Almost all tigers have a lifespan of 10-15 years in the wild.” “Very few tigers live longer than 25 years.” There is a direct way of reasoning with “almost all” and you can also argue backwards with “almost all.”
An example of direct reasoning would be; “Almost all tigers have a lifespan of 10-15 years in the wild. Manny is a tiger. So Manny will have a lifespan of 10-15 years in the wild.
An example of arguing backwards would be; “Almost all tigers have a lifespan of 10-15 years in the wild. Manny has lived 14 years in the wild. Manny is a tiger.”
Hey Shasta files I really liked your post about vague generalities. Your post had a lot of good information about the concept and it made it easy to understand the major points of vague generalities. I also really enjoyed your example you found in the textbook of the ambiguous words all and some, and the fact that they are actually valid. The best part of your post in my opinion was your example of tigers and their life spans. It made it simple to understand the concept of direct reasoning in a fun and imagine way. Overall I really liked your post and hope you keep it up.
ReplyDelete