Sophisme Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre. Un sophisme est une argumentation à la logique fallacieuse. C'est un raisonnement qui cherche à paraître rigoureux mais qui n'est en réalité pas valide au sens de la logique (quand bien même sa conclusion serait pourtant la « vraie »). À l'inverse du paralogisme, qui est une erreur dans un raisonnement, le sophisme est fallacieux : il est prononcé avec l'intention de tromper l'auditoire afin, par exemple, de prendre l'avantage dans une discussion. Souvent, les sophismes prennent l'apparence d'un syllogisme (qui repose sur des prémisses insuffisantes ou non-pertinentes ou qui procède par enthymème, etc.). Ils peuvent aussi s'appuyer sur d'autres mécanismes psychologiques jouant par exemple avec l'émotion de l'auditoire, l'ascendant social du locuteur (argument d'autorité) ou des biais cognitifs (comme l'oubli de la fréquence de base). Origines du mot[modifier | modifier le code] Exemples[modifier | modifier le code] Le ridicule ne tue pas,
Base rate fallacy Base rate fallacy, also called base rate neglect or base rate bias, is an error in thinking. If presented with related base rate information (i.e. generic, general information) and specific information (information only pertaining to a certain case), the mind tends to ignore the former and focus on the latter. This is what the base rate fallacy refers to. Example 1 John is a man who wears gothic inspired clothing, has long black hair, and listens to death metal. If people were asked this question, they would likely underestimate the probability of him being a Christian, and overestimate the probability of him being a Satanist. Example 2 A group of policemen have breathalyzers displaying false drunkenness in 5% of the cases tested. Many would answer as high as 0.95, but the correct probability is about 0.02. To find the correct answer, one should use Bayes' theorem. where "D" means that the breathalyzer indicates that the driver is drunk. which gives Example 3
6 Brainwashing Techniques They're Using On You Right Now Brainwashing doesn't take any sci-fi gadgetry or Manchurian Candidate hypnotism bullshit. There are all sorts of tried-and-true techniques that anyone can use to bypass the thinking part of your brain and flip a switch deep inside that says "OBEY." Now I know what you're thinking. "Sure, just make an ad with some big ol' titties on there! That'll convince people!" While that's certainly true ... ... they've got a whole arsenal of manipulation techniques that go way beyond even the most effective of titties. Every cult leader, drill sergeant, self-help guru and politician knows that if you want to quiet all of those pesky doubting thoughts in a crowd, get them to chant a repetitive phrase or slogan. Sounds like: "Say it with me now, folks!" "One, two, three, four, I, Love, The Marine, Corps. Why It Works: The "Analytical" part of your brain and the "Repetitive Task" part tend to operate in separate rooms. Meditation works the same way, with chants or mantras meant to "calm the mind."
List of Fallacies A fallacy is incorrect argument in logic and rhetoric resulting in a lack of validity, or more generally, a lack of soundness. Fallacies are either formal fallacies or informal fallacies. Formal fallacies Main article: Formal fallacy Appeal to probability – is a statement that takes something for granted because it would probably be the case (or might be the case).Argument from fallacy – assumes that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion is false.Base rate fallacy – making a probability judgment based on conditional probabilities, without taking into account the effect of prior probabilities.Conjunction fallacy – assumption that an outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probable than an outcome satisfying a single one of them.Masked man fallacy (illicit substitution of identicals) – the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one. Propositional fallacies
Fundamental attribution error In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error, also known as the correspondence bias or attribution effect, is people's tendency to place an undue emphasis on internal characteristics to explain someone else's behavior in a given situation, rather than considering external factors. It does not explain interpretations of one's own behavior, where situational factors are more easily recognized and can thus be taken into consideration. Conversely, from the other perspective this error is known as the actor–observer bias, in which people tend to overemphasize the role of a situation in their behaviors and underemphasize the role of their own personalities. Examples Alice, a driver, is about to pass through an intersection. Details Classic demonstration study: Jones and Harris (1967) Subjects read essays for and against Fidel Castro, and were asked to rate the pro-Castro attitudes of the writers. Explanations Cultural differences in the error See also
15 styles of Distorted Thinking 15 styles of Distorted Thinking Filtering: You take the negative details and magnify them while filtering out all positive aspects of a situation. Polarized Thinking: Things are black or white, good or bad. You have to be perfect or you're a failure. There is no middle ground. Checklist for Hidden Anger Procrastination in the completion of imposed tasks. SCHOPENHAUER'S 38 STRATAGEMS, OR 38 WAYS TO WIN AN ARGUMENT Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), was a brilliant German philosopher. These 38 Stratagems are excerpts from "The Art of Controversy", first translated into English and published in 1896. Carry your opponent's proposition beyond its natural limits; exaggerate it. (abstracted from the book:Numerical Lists You Never Knew or Once Knew and Probably Forget, by: John Boswell and Dan Starer)
Grandma's Experiences Leave Epigenetic Mark on Your Genes Darwin and Freud walk into a bar. Two alcoholic mice — a mother and her son — sit on two bar stools, lapping gin from two thimbles. The mother mouse looks up and says, “Hey, geniuses, tell me how my son got into this sorry state.” “Bad inheritance,” says Darwin. “Bad mothering,” says Freud. For over a hundred years, those two views — nature or nurture, biology or psychology — offered opposing explanations for how behaviors develop and persist, not only within a single individual but across generations. And then, in 1992, two young scientists following in Freud’s and Darwin’s footsteps actually did walk into a bar. The bar was in Madrid, where the Cajal Institute, Spain’s oldest academic center for the study of neurobiology, was holding an international meeting. “I can still visualize the place — it was a corner bar that specialized in pizza,” Meaney says. The two engaged in animated conversation about a hot new line of research in genetics.
Home | MIT Video MIT has announced a $1 billion commitment to address the global opportunities and challenges presented by the prevalence of computing and the rise of artificial intelligence (AI). Read more: The initiative marks the single largest investment in computing and AI by an American academic institution, and will help position the United States to lead the world in preparing for the rapid evolution of computing and AI. Watch more videos from MIT: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is an independent, coeducational, privately endowed university in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The MIT YouTube channel features videos about all types of MIT research, including the robot cheetah, LIGO, gravitational waves, mathematics, and bombardier beetles, as well as videos on origami, time capsules, and other aspects of life and culture on the MIT campus. #massachusettsinstituteoftechnology Show less
The Art of Being Right The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831) (Eristische Dialektik: Die Kunst, Recht zu Behalten) is an acidulous and sarcastic treatise written by the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer in sarcastic deadpan. In it, Schopenhauer examines a total of thirty-eight methods of showing up one's opponent in a debate. He introduces his essay with the idea that philosophers have concentrated in ample measure on the rules of logic, but have not (especially since the time of Immanuel Kant) engaged with the darker art of the dialectic, of controversy. Whereas the purpose of logic is classically said to be a method of arriving at the truth, dialectic, says Schopenhauer, "...on the other hand, would treat of the intercourse between two rational beings who, because they are rational, ought to think in common, but who, as soon as they cease to agree like two clocks keeping exactly the same time, create a disputation, or intellectual contest." Publication A. Synopsis
Technologies for Hacking the Brain Despite a century of sustained research, brain scientists remain ignorant of the workings of the three-pound organ that is the seat of all conscious human activity. Many have tried to attack this problem by examining the nervous systems of simpler organisms. In fact, almost 30 years have passed since investigators mapped the connections among each of the 302 nerve cells in the roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans. Yet the worm-wiring diagram did not yield an understanding of how these connections give rise to even rudimentary behaviors such as feeding and sex. What was missing were data relating the activity of neurons to specific behaviors. The difficulty in establishing a link between biology and behavior in humans is still more acute. Select an option below: Customer Sign In *You must have purchased this issue or have a qualifying subscription to access this content
beastly About Me Musician, Cloud Security Architect and Teacher so far by vocation, religious polemicist, spiritual seeker and wordwright by avocation. But still shuffling the deck... My Profile Education School : PCCYear : 1988 to 1992City : TucsonDegree : Music Theory and Composition Professional Job : PartnerCompany : iPhonetics International Interests Hobbies : MusicMusic : yesMovie : 9th configurationTV : noVideo Games : GTASABooks : Finnegan's WakeMagazines : TikunFavorite Drinks : The MacAllanActivities : reading, writing Favourite Websites Share More
La Dialectique éristique Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre. Définition[modifier | modifier le code] « La dialectique éristique est l'art de la controverse. » Cet art repose sur la distinction entre la vérité objective d'une proposition et l'apparence de vérité que cette proposition peut prendre aux yeux des disputeurs et des auditeurs. Causes et fonctions de la dialectique[modifier | modifier le code] Si les hommes étaient honnêtes, il n'y aurait pas de dialectique. la malhonnêteté ;la vanité ;le fait de parler avant de réfléchir ;l'obstination dans l'erreur. Une autre cause est que l'expérience enseigne que lorsque nos arguments en faveur d'une thèse sont réfutés, il pourra toujours se trouver un nouvel argument qui nous donnera finalement raison. Le résultat de cet ensemble est que tout homme veut que sa thèse paraisse vraie, même (et surtout) quand il sait qu'elle est fausse. En conséquence, les moyens de cet art relèvent de la ruse et de l'adresse ; chacun en est pourvu, quoique de manière inégale.