The Basis of a Strong Argument

Fred Allebach

2010

 Any statement constitutes a thesis (hypothesis), a premise in need of proof.

Dirty Harry: “opinions are like assholes, everybody’s got one”

-gets down to the STRENGTH of the argument: to what degree does it explain phenomena?, what is the proof?

1: OBSERVER BIAS:

-tendency to find what you’re looking for/ uncertainty principle/ to a hammer the whole world looks like nails

-easy to be parochial  and shoehorn everything into your basic assumptions, admit only theses that stand in support: example of global warming, you can always find someone to tell you what you want to hear

-so in one respect: citing a bunch of references is not necessarily any kind of proof, the emotional strength of an argument does not seem to require a solid factual basis

-proof comes with how things stand up with a wider net cast on top

-example of Galileo and church teachings: they learned from that mistake, Galileo was clearly right, hence, no literal Bible translation when it conflicts with demonstrated scientific truth/ Pope John Paul 2 “truth cannot contradict truth”

2: ASSUMPTIONS:

-there’s always an a priori assumption about how the world works, of what constitutes admissible evidence: atomism/ holism, in atomism all can be reduced to constituent parts, in holism/ systems theory the truth can’t be deduced, it’s too complex, the whole is more than the sum of its parts, emergent properties come unexpectedly and can’t be predicted

-Occam’s Razor, is a bias towards deduction and reductionism

- lumpers/ splitters, gradualism/ catastrophism (punctuated equilibrium)

-William of Occam: 14thC Franciscan friar/ Scholastic philosopher/ major figure of Medieval thought

Deduction/induction

Inductive: particular to general

Deductive general to particular

-this is a methodical diff., not one of belief

- by concentrating on the method, it’s an effort to reduce the effect of belief or observer bias

-not possible to completely expunge bias

-can’t escape observer bias/ uncertainty principle and enter an arena of pure objectivity, particularly in human sciences/ it’s a house of mirrors/ in Flatland lines cannot comprehend circles

-people are at once subjects and objects/ not billiard balls/ a messy situation

Deduction:

-it’s logical reasoning, reason is a capacity we have/ intellect

-this reason was used by the Founders, if you want to get to tradition

-the premise and all statements are valid

-all dogs are mortal, Scruffy is a dog, therefore Scruffy is mortal

-you can use deductive reasoning and be wrong if the premises are wrong:

-everyone who eats granola is a liberal, Bob eats granola, therefore Bob is a liberal

Inductive:

-it’s metaphorical/ the font of all theses/ connecting the dots/ imaginative

-strong induction: all observed fish have fins, therefore, all fish have fins

-weak induction: many speeding tickets are given to teens, therefore, all teens drive fast

-weak induction: house of mirrors, solipsism, nothing is real/ all is mental

-induction is logically sound, it just doesn’t justify the premises

-in social sciences the level of proof is better than religion but not up to the level of hard science

the Scientific Method:

-a process of discovery

- focuses on empirical evidence, has some basis in objective reality, can be deduced

-methodological naturalism: nature is all there is, no need to resort to supernatural explanations

-immanent within the system/ not transcendent, there’s nothing outside nature/ Avatar

-rational explanations exist: phenomena is observable, measurable, it is the real world that is being observed

-falsifiable

-has some predictive value

-math is the language of science: geometry

History of Science:

-all methods have claimed to be the last word

-methodological naturalism is the current top dog

-Aristotle/ ancient Greeks/ not just dead white men

-Scholasticism: natural explanations for God and creation, Doctrine of Similitudes

-Enlightenment: not theistic, people are capable of figuring out natural laws, notion of progress, sequential, builds upon itself

-Positivism all, including human experience is reducible to logic and science

-Darwin, evolution, Social Darwinism

-modern stuff:

-Karl Popper: falsification

-Thomas S. Kuhn: structure of scientific revolutions, paradigm shift, social aspects

-Michel Foucault: discourse/ speech community/ boundaries of what can be talked about

-postmodernists/ realists/ science wars: radical relativism/ scientific theories are social constructs/ solipsism (all is mental), extremists use social construction arguments to discredit real issues like global warming

Middle Path: between plurality and unity, deduction/ induction, object/ subject

-can’t have this constant all or nothing view

-trouble comes when people resist falsification when another program has more explanatory power