David Ziegler
Web Assignment #3
October 4,2006
The five common thinking errors happens in our every day life. People make these mistakes and don't even realize that they are making them. The five errors are:
1) Non Sequitur
2) False and Vague Premises
3) Ad Hominem
4) Begging the Question
5) Red Herrings
1) My cousin and I had a conversation during the time I was trying to choose a high school to attend. his thoughts made no sense because he made one of the thinking errors. Here's the dialogue:
Dan: What have you narrowed your choices down to?
Me: Either SLUH or St. Mary's. I'm looking for a challenge. I don't want to go to a school where I can just walk through it.
Dan: I think that SLUH would be a great fit for you because it's a big school and it's very challenging. St. Mary's would be a breeze for you though, you could get A's there without really trying.
Me: I know that's why I'm leaning towards SLUH.
Dan: I would go to St. Mary's if I were you. It would be so much easier.
My cousin's conclusion didn't follow logically to the premises. This is an example of the thinking error, non sequiturs. The premises were all true. I was looking for a challenge and Sluh would give me that, and St. Mary's wouldn't. the conclusion said i should go to St. Mary's still, but that makes no sense.
2) When I was a little boy I loved to play all kinds of sports. I'll never forget the first time I went skiing. I was about eight or nine years old and I was so excited. I thought that it would be a piece of cake and that I would be amazing. I thought that everybody knows how to ski and that everyone who skis is good at it. I was not good at skiing. I remember falling all the time. I seriosly thought that since "everybody" skis and that "everyone" is "good" at it that I would be good at it. I made a huge and painful error. I couldn't handle the bunny slope. I would either turn off course or just simply fall and slide down the slope on my butt. It was a very disappointing day for me, but i learned that my pre-conceived notion of skiing was completely false.
In this story I made the thinking error of making my conclusion based on false and vague Premises. Not everyone skis and all the people who do aren't necessarily good at it. My premises were false so my conclusion was false also.
3) Not to long ago, my cousin Molly came to one of my soccer games. After the game i went up to her to talk a little bit. She said that I played a good game, but there were a few times that I made the wrong pass. I knew that I had turned the ball over a few times. She told me that on one of my break aways I had a guy wide open on my left , but instead of passing to him and probably getting a goal. I dribbled myself and got the ball stolen. I didn't know how to respond because a girl who had never played soccer before was telling me what I should have done. I told her that she didn't know what she was talking about because she was a girl. I knew she was right but i said it anysays.
My cousin knew what she was talking about even though she has never played soccer before. She knew that the pass was the right thing to do, but she's a girl and didn't play soccer so i said she was wrong. This is an example of the ad hominem error. I attacked a quality in my cousin instead of attacking her argument. My argument was totally irrelevant to what she had to say.
4) My brother and I always argue on who is better than the other at what. He always claims he's better than me. Here is the dialogue to one of these arguments that happened a few days ago:
Scott: I could definitely beat you in a two mile race.
Me: How do you know you can beat me? You sound really confident for a guy who is overweight and hasn't run in a long time.
Scott: Because I can beat you.
Scott doesn't get anywhere with his argument. He just goes right back to where he started. He makes the error of begging the question. He really has no argument. he just says that he can beat me, but he has no reasons why he can beat me.
5) Another time that my brother and I were fighting he tried to bring up something totally irrelevant to throw me off the argument. We were fighting about why he eats unhealthy and doesn't try to lose weight. Why he was still living at home and what he needs to do to get out of our parents house. I was destroying him in the argument. He had nothing to come back at me with, so he brought something up that had happened a long time ago. He said, "Well, if you want me out of the house so bad why don't you give me your money so I can use it to move out." He used money as an excuse when he makes plenty of money. the problem is that he doesn't save any of his money. He spends it all at the bar or casino or going out with his friends.
He uses a red herring which is totally beside the point of the argument. Money is not the issue because he has plenty of it to move out. He just doesn't save it. The red herring, "give me your money so I can use that." has nothing to do with defenfding his argument. he tries to make a point that doesn't deal with the situation and that is making the thinking error, red herrings.