Critical thinking thoughts

 

1. Probability/ Possibility

Probability and possibility are similar in meaning but yet have some subtle differences. Probability is used mostly in a mathematical sense; it is usually used in statistics. Probability means the extent to which an event is likely to occur. It indicates the likelihood of an event happening. It is calculated as the ratio of possible outcomes to the total number of outcomes.

Possibility is a term used mostly in the sense of ‘can’.  It refers to the capability of an event taking place or getting done. For example, when we ask someone, “Is there a possibility you are free tomorrow?”, we are inquiring about the capability of the other person to be free the next day. We wouldn’t use the term “probability” in this scenario. This is because we use the term “possibility” when we are trying to find out the capability rather than a statistical ratio.

Probability would be used during elections, for example. We could calculate the total number of outcomes and find out the outcomes wherein a certain party could win.

Probability is a subset of possibility. Possibility is surer than probability. While an event may exist, the chances of that event happening is called probability. Possibility is a reference to something happening while probability is a theory of that event happening. For a probability to become a possibility, all the happenings have to come together. Probability depends on the availability of possibilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. The list of fallacies

Logical fallacies may be called the gaps in reasoning that invalidate arguments. They may not be easy to spot sometimes, but there are many types of fallacies.

1) The straw man fallacy: This happens when our argument is oversimplified or misinterpreted to make it easier to attack. Our full argument may not be addressed but the speaker might present a weaker version of our stance, making it seem they are defeating you.

2) Bandwagon fallacy: This fallacy may also be called the “appeal to common belief” fallacy because it motivates people to do something or believe in something just because everyone else is doing it. Population alone is not enough to validate an argument. Arguments of this style do not take into account whether the people making this argument are qualified to do so or not.

3) Appeal to authority fallacy: When someone uses his fallacy, they claim that their argument must be true because it is validated by someone who has authority on the subject. While it may not always be fallacious, it may become dangerous when someone relies too heavily on a single person for validation.

4) False dilemma fallacy: This fallacy presents an issue in terms of two opposing ideas instead of a number of possible outcomes. It can lead to false credence to extreme stances ignoring compromises and chances to reframe the issue.

5) Hasty generalization fallacy: This fallacy occurs when a generalization has been made based on insufficient evidence. Hence, potential arguments are overlooked.

6) Slothful induction fallacy: This is the opposite of hasty generalization fallacy where despite sufficient evidence strongly indicating a conclusion is true, it is not acknowledged and the outcome is attributed to something completely unrelated.

7) Correlation/causation fallacy: This is a fallacy wherein, just because two events are correlated, one of them is irrefutably assumed to cause the other event.

8) Anecdotal evidence fallacy: This fallacy uses someone’s personal experience instead of logical reasoning. These arguments fail to acknowledge the fact that one example cannot stand as proof for all premises.

9) Texas sharpshooter fallacy: Instead of letting a full spectrum of ideas lead to a logical conclusion, the speakers find ideas and patterns in support of their goals and ignore the evidence that contradicts them.

10) Middle ground fallacy: This fallacy assumes that a compromise between two opposing stances must always be true. These arguments ignore the possibility of one or both of these extremes being false.

11) Burden of proof fallacy: Just because there is no evidence provided against something, it doesn’t mean that the argument is false.

12) Personal incredulity fallacy: Just because there is some difficulty in understanding something is true, it doesn’t make the argument false automatically. A personal or collective lack of understanding isn’t enough to render a fact invalid.

13) “No true Scotsman” fallacy: Instead of acknowledging that a counterpart to an argument may exist, the speaker may amend the terms of the argument.

14) Tu-quoque fallacy: Tu-quoque is Latin for “you too”. This argument answers criticism with criticism but never presents a counterargument to the original disputed claim.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Anderson's nations

Benedict Anderson is one of the most important and influential political thinkers who got much acclaim for his 1983 book, “Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism”. Anderson considers nations to be “imagined communities”, not because a nation is fake, but rather that any community so large where all the members do not know each other face to face must be imagined to some degree. Anderson brought out three paradoxes of nationalism in his book:

1) Nationalism is a recent and modern concept despite nations being thought of as old as timeless.

2) Nationalism is universal wherein every individual belongs to a nation yet every nation is completely different from every other nation.

3) Nationalism is an idea so influential that people will die for their nation, but at the same time, it is difficult to define.

According to Anderson, nationalism came about only after people began rejecting these three beliefs about their society.

1) Certain languages like Latin were superior to others in terms of universal truths.

2) The divine right to rule was granted to rulers of society, usually monarchs, and was a natural basis for organizing society.

3) The origins of the world and humankind were the same.

Anderson views nation state-building as imitative and transportable in which new political identities were copying the model of the nation state. As Anderson sees it, the large number of political entities that came up in North America around 1778, almost all of which defined themselves as nations, were historically the first such states and therefore inevitably provided the first model of what such states should look like. According to Anderson, these nations led to the phenomenon of the rise of nations: communities limited by their borders and were sovereign.

 

 

 

 

4. Hegemony

Hegemony is the political, economic, and military predominance of one state over other states. In the field of international relations, hegemony refers to the ability of an actor to shape an international system. Usually, the actor is a state, such as Britain in the 19^th century or the United States in the 20^th and 21^st centuries. A hegemon may change the state in coercive or non-coercive means. Benevolent hegemons provide the country with goods within their sphere of influence. Coercive hegemons exert their military or economic power to discipline unruly states. Exploitative hegemons extract resources from other countries. In Marxist philosophy, cultural hegemony is the domination of a culturally diverse society by the ruling class who manipulates the culture of the society. Hence, the worldview of the ruling class becomes the accepted norm. As the universal dominant ideology, the ruling-class worldview misinterprets the social, political, and economic status quo as natural, inevitable, and perpetual social conditions that benefit every ruling class rather than artificial social constructs that benefit only the ruling class.