To evaluate a probabilistic generalization we need to do more than to find one or two counterexamples. Which of the following questions should be asked when evaluating the logical strength of a probabilistic generalization?
(a) Can I think of at least three possible counterexamples?
(b) Is the generalization consistent with common sense?
(c) Were enough cases considered?
(d) What are the implications of the generalization, if it is true?
c
You might also like to view...
Reverend Owens says that he thinks gay marriage is OK and that it’s a matter of basic civil rights. But really he’s saying that every imaginable kind of perversion and immorality is just fine with him! His view amounts to saying that people should be allowed to do just anything at all! But surely that is a crazy idea! commits the fallacy of
A. appeal to pity B. appeal to force C. appeal to emotion D. ad hominem E. beside the point F. straw man
Mitsein is:
1. human fellowship. 2. non-human existence. 3. being-in-itself. 4. Being.
According to Aristotle, for what reason is happiness chosen?
a. For the sake of what it produces. b. It is chosen for its own sake. c. It produces pleasure. d. All of these choices. e. None of these choices.
Leibniz claims that the basic building blocks of the universe are
a) materialistic seeds. b) Monads. c) Theodes. d) Plenums