Week 7 · Readings & resources

Week 7 — Readings & Resources

Critical Thinking Free sample edition

Your primary reading is Chapter 7 (in this module). Everything below is the optional, go-deeper layer — pick what helps, skip the rest.

How to use this page

This page has 10 items (4 readings and 6 videos). Allow 53–64 minutes for everything. Each group points back to the matching chapter section and class-session segment, so use the full menu when you want more, or take the quick path below.

Every video here has captions: turn them on with the CC button in the player. The chapter covers the same ideas in text.

Pick-one quick path (18–21 min total)

① Answering the person instead of the reasons

Chapter 7, Section “Answer the reasons, not the person: attacks on the person” · Session 1, Segment 2, “Answer the reasons, not the person” · Remember: a fact about the speaker can change how far you trust their testimony, but it never refutes their argument.

CRITICAL THINKING - Fallacies: Ad Hominem — Wireless Philosophy — an eight-minute animated lesson on rejecting an argument by attacking the person who made it, with four subtypes; as you watch, match the abusive, circumstantial, and you-too subtypes to the treasurer, the bike-shop owner, and the doctor from the chapter, and notice that the fourth, guilt by association, is not one this course keys. (video, 8 min) (captions: creator)
The Ad Hominem Fallacy — PBS Idea Channel — a two-minute explainer on criticizing the person instead of the idea, with a short you-too example about a speaker's own eating habits; afterward, say in one sentence why the speaker's habits do not bear on whether the idea is sound. (video, 2 min) (captions: creator)
FTC's Endorsement Guides: What People Are Asking — Federal Trade Commission — a federal agency's question-and-answer page on paid endorsements; read the opening section, About the Endorsement Guides, and notice that disclosing a payment helps you judge how much weight a recommendation deserves, which is the fair use of a conflict of interest. Use it while working through the Week-7 module overview. (reading, 6–9 min)

② Answering a view nobody stated, or changing the subject

Chapter 7, Section “Answer the real view: the straw man” · Session 1, Segment 3, “Answer the real view” · Remember: write the other side's position the way its holders would, and hold every answer to the question that was asked.

CRITICAL THINKING - Fallacies: Straw Man Fallacy — Wireless Philosophy — a six-minute animated lesson on misrepresenting an opponent's claim in order to argue against it; this builds on Week 2's work with the principle of charity, since a straw man picks the reading that is easiest to beat. (video, 6 min) (captions: creator)
Red Herring - Critical Thinking Fallacies — Wireless Philosophy — a six-minute animated lesson on bringing in a point that seems relevant but distracts from the real issue, with a courtroom speech about how gruesome a crime was, a reply about one program in place of an answer to the question asked, and a dinner-drink argument full of tangents; afterward, say in one sentence why the repainted shuttles fit it and the farmers' market does not. (video, 6 min) (captions: creator)

③ Feelings and head counts in place of reasons

Chapter 7, Section “Weigh the feeling: appeals to fear, pity, and popularity” · Session 2, Segment 4, “What the feeling replaces” · Remember: emotion is fine when it fits good reasons, and it is a fallacy only when it replaces them.

Judge by Tears: Appeal to Pity Fallacy — Searchlighter — a short explanation of offering sympathy in place of reasons, which also notes that sympathy can be relevant when the hardship bears on the conclusion; compare it with the chapter's A-grade passage and say what evidence the student left out. (video, 2 min) (captions: automatic)

④ When an expert's word is good evidence

Chapter 7, Section “Check the expert: appeals to authority” · Session 2, Segment 6, “Check the expert” · Remember: run three checks on any expert, namely the right field, broad agreement among experts, and no stake in your answer.

The Appeal to Authority: When Fallacious Arguments Rely on Expertise — Effectiviology — a plain-language article on when relying on an expert is reasonable and when it becomes a fallacy; read the opening explanation and the examples section, and skip the history and related-concepts sections for now. (reading, 8–11 min)
Appeal to Authority (Misunderstood Fallacies) — Thinking About Stuff — a six-minute talk on why trusting a reliable expert is often good reasoning and when it goes wrong; listen for the conditions that make testimony count as evidence. (video, 6 min) (captions: automatic)
Take My Word for It: On Testimony — 1000-Word Philosophy — a short essay on how much of what we know comes from other people's word and on an old debate about when that word deserves trust; read it as background for why a good appeal to authority is evidence at all. (reading, 6–9 min)

Optional one-stop reference (free online reference)

Ad Hominem (Fallacies) — Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy — the reference entry's short paragraph on the attack on the person, with a compact example; read that one paragraph and skip the rest of the long list for now. (reading, 3–5 min)

Heads-up (links rot): these point to outside sites that occasionally move or rename pages. If a link ever fails, tell your instructor and use the reference above in the meantime.

Provenance: Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com