Reason: Web Assignment
Five Common Thinking Errors
Write a short story or conversation illustrating the five common thinking errors from the text.
One fine afternoon, Andrew and Steve walked back to the Jr. parking lot on the SLUH campus, only to find a crowd standing around and a policeman talking to Eric, another junior. Apparently, Eric's 1989 Toyota Corolla had been stolen during school. Andrew and Steve began to talk about who could have stolen the car and why.
"Hey Steve," Andrew said, "didn't you say you really wanted a Corolla?"
"Ummm, yeah, I guess," Steve replied.
Andrew continued, "Hey, you don't really like Eric do you? You must've stolen Eric's car!"(*1)
"You're crazy," said Steve.
"Whatever," said Andrew, "I remember you also said that you would do anything to get a Toyota Corolla. Come on, I know it was you."(*2)
"Stop messing around Andrew! That doesn't make any sense," Steve exclaimed.
"What would you know," Andrew countered, "you're stupid and didn't even pass Mr. Sciuto's test on reason!"(*3)
"Oh yeah?!?" said Steve, "well, ummmm I saw you copy off of Cornelius in PreCalcus yesterday!"(*4)
"That is it," andrew yelled, "I am going right to that cop over there to tell him what you did!"
Andrew walked on over the the policeman, and told him that he had information regarding who stole the car.
"What do you know?> said the polcieman.
"See that kid over there?" He pointed to Steve, "he stole the car."
"Oh really," the policeman stated, "how do you know?"
"Well," Andrew uttered, "because he did and would do something like that anyways."(*5)
The policeman laughed at such an imcomplete accusation, and Andrew turned away in embarassment under the wretched glare of Steve's angry eyes.
*1-Andrew's argument that Steve wanted a Corolla and disliked Eric led him to the conclusion that Steve stoel the car. This is a non-sequitur, for the conclusion does not logically follow the premisses.
*2-Andrew argues that Steve would do anything for a Corolla proves that he stole the car. This argument contains the vague premiss that Steve would do anything to get a Corolla, even by stealing, when really Steve was using a figure of speech.
*3-In this argument, Andrew counters Steve by calling him stupid for not pasing a test on reason. Andrew uses "Ad Hominem" and attacks a quality of Steve rather than the argument itself.
*4-Steve counters Andrew's many false arguments by throwing out a red herring. He yells that Andrew cheated on a test to distract everyone from the issue of the car, for the argument had nothing to do with the issue at the present moment.
*5-Andrew encounters the policeman and tells him that Steve stole the car, but backs up his accusation by begging the question and just saying that Steve stole the car because he did and he would.