Philosophers are in the business of either drawing distinctions or collapsing them. A case of the latter is David Hume’s observation that, all this palaver to the contrary notwithstanding, causation just is correlation. A case of the former is the… Read More ›
Critical Thinking
THE OUTCOMES FALLACY
The way to test your argument for validity is what we might call the that’s-like-saying test. You give me your argument, I provide an analogous argument – analogous in the sense of sharing what we call your argument’s argument form… Read More ›
WHEN AN AD BACULUM ISN’T A FALLACY
There’s an important distinction – one too many critical thinking instructors fail to make – between, on the one hand, what’s likely to be true, and, on the other, what one’d be well advised to believe. For example, that Jesus… Read More ›
THE CRITICAL THINKING PROFESSOR’S DILEMMA
S asserts that not-p. S is paid. Therefore S is paid to assert that not-p. The likelihood of the truth of not-p varies inversely with what one is paid to assert it. If one’s been exposed to the evidence… Read More ›
Paulosophical Vimplications 