Blumenthal

Common

errors

of

human

inquiry

May

Jen

Elswick

Comments

Concept

image

of

the

six

most

common

questions

and

answers

on

a

signpost

Question

What

are

common

errors

of

human

inquiry

Some

of

the

common

errors

of

human

inquiry

include

inaccurate

observations

overgeneralization

selective

observation

and

illogical

reasoning

Inaccurate

observations

are

simply

that

a

failure

to

report

accurately

what

one

has

witnessed

This

error

is

common

when

we

are

not

mindful

in

our

approach

to

observation

The

fallacy

of

overgeneralization

occurs

when

we

observe

a

phenomenon

and

misapply

our

findings

to

the

broader

categories

of

the

phenomenons

components

One

example

would

be

a

tow

truck

driver

who

observes

that

three

out

of

the

four

car

wrecks

she

has

witnessed

in

a

week

have

involved

female

drivers

as

culprits

and

then

pronounces

that

females

are

bad

drivers

Selective

observation

can

be

thought

of

as

an

illusory

correlation

between

variables

whereby

observations

of

a

phenomenon

that

fit

with

an

observers

preexisting

orientation

count

more

cognitively

speaking

than

those

that

do

not

In

our

tow

truck

driver

example

the

driver

would

be

making

a

selective

observation

if

her

perspective

that

men

are

better

drivers

than

women

led

her

to

ignore

the

fact

that

over

the

course

of

the

month

out

of

car

wrecks

observed

could

be

attributed

to

errors

by

male

drivers

in

favor

of

the

lesser

amount

of

cases

where

females

were

the

culprits

Illogical

reasoning

is

drawing

a

false

conclusion

through

a

faulty

analysis

of

observations

An

example

of

this

reasoning

would

be

a

belief

that

I

will

win

a

lottery

jackpot

next

week

since

Ive

had

nothing

but

bad

luck

in

this

endeavor

for

the

past

three

weeks

also

known

as

the

gamblers

fallacy

Wheres

the

global

warming

Expert

says

public

are

growing

sceptical

of

climate

change

is

an

article

I

found

on

the

Internet

that

aptly

demonstrates

the

errors

of

overgeneralization

selective

observation

and

illogical

reasoning

The

author

notes

Scientists

from

the

Intergovernmental

Panel

on

Climate

Change

IPCC

once

predicted

a

temperature

rise

of

degrees

per

decade

but

are

now

baffled

by

the

fact

our

planets

temperature

has

not

increased

for

almost

two

decades

Not

only

is

he

choosing

this

particular

anomaly

to

illustrate

his

point

that

climate

change

isnt

real

to

the

exclusion

of

overwhelming

scientific

evidence

to

the

contrary

selective

observation

but

he

is

attempting

to

overgeneralize

uncertainty

about

one

failed

prediction

to

The

author

understands

that

the

use

of

authority

to

create

an

agreement

reality

around

the

question

of

whether

or

not

climate

change

is

a

global

threat

is

a

potent

tool

for

making

an

argument

so

he

uses

a

socalled

expert

to

add

value

to

his

assertions

Note

Given

the

number

of

inquiry

errors

in

this

article

it

might

too

be

worth

investigating

whether

or

not

the

chosen

doctor

is

an

actual

expert

on

these

issues

inaccurate

observations

but

I

am

not

qualified

to

make

that

assessment

When

discussing

the

scientific

community

and

their

beliefs

about

the

problems

of

climate

change

the

expert

says

The

reality

is

that

they

are

quite

relieved

in

a

way

and

we

should

all

be

relieved

that

it

isnt

such

a

big

problem

at

present

With

this

statement

he

at

once

overgeneralizes

the

concerns

of

a

very

few

scientists

as

those

of

the

entire

scientific

community

and

demonstrates

the

illogical

reasoning

that

we

should

all

not

worry

about

the

effects

of

climate

change

in

the

presence

of

dissent

from

a

few

individuals

The

doctor

in

the

article

discusses

Chinas

and

Indias

need

for

energy

resources

in

the

form

of

fossil

fuels

Why

do

you

think

that

information

is

included

in

an

article

whose

intent

is

to

cast

aspersions

on

the

science

behind

climate

change

For

information

on

why

people

might

be

skeptical

about

climate

science

consider

the

following

article

that

explains

how

individuals

worldviews

and

political

ideologies

can

interfere

with

fair

evaluations

of

scientific

findings

httptalkingclimateorgguidesbeyondclimatesciencewhypeoplearestillskepticalofclimatechange

errors

Previous

Post

My

research

interest

Next

Post

The

rising

cost

of

health

care

thoughts

on

Common

errors

of

human

inquiry

Zaira

August

at

pm

This

has

been

very

helpful

Thank

you

Dessa

October

at

am

Thank

you

for

this

Its

been

a

big

help

O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O B I O B I B O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

human inquiry
inaccurate observations
overgeneralization


Copia Rifle Magazine Carrier 4999 1 Color Please Choose An Option Qty The Copia rifle magazine carriers are premium dutygrade injectionmolded magazine carriers designed for harduse daily concealed carry Their innovative cavity design and retention system allows them to be used ambidextrously with both aluminum and polymer AR magazines from many manufacturers They have a bodyhugging contour which is not only more comfortable than traditional magazine carriers it is also more concealable The Copia rifle magazine carrier can be used in both the traditional rounds pointing rearward or rounds pointing forward methods of carry These carriers will ship with 15 Standard OWB belt loops They are compatible with all of our mounting options and additional loop sizes with can be purchased separately Reviews 5 Average based on 1 review Written by Ryan on 19th Mar 2018 Ran great Ran this carrier through carrier through a couple hundred reloads this weekend in a class Not once did it strip a round or drop the magazine even through complex movements Planning to pickup a few more

B I I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O