Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 8 votes

Rhetorical Devices Used in Literary Logic

common fears

169 replies to this topic

#141 status - Guest

status - Guest
  • Guests

Posted 23 December 2017 - 01:50 PM

 

58 cognitive biases that screw up everything we do
 
We like to think we're rational human beings. 
 
In fact, we are prone to hundreds of proven biases that cause us to think and act irrationally, and even thinking we're rational despite evidence of irrationality in others is known as blind spot bias.
 
The study of how often human beings do irrational things was enough for psychologist Daniel Kahneman to win the Nobel Prize in Economics, and it opened the rapidly expanding field of behavioral economics. Similar insights are also reshaping everything from marketing to criminology.
 
Hoping to clue you — and ourselves — into the biases that frame our decisions, we've collected a long list of the most notable ones.
 
This is an update of an article that was previously published, with additional contributions by Drake Baer.
 
 
1*yN2Xhv-M5PPerWzDVNt3sw.jpeg

 

 

:chuckle:

 

Logical fallacy leads us right into cognitive bias. In fact fallacy creates bias of all kinds. The trick in alleviating any confusion created is to ask yourself which bias' apply to your own opinion. That is if you're willing to admit your own thinking may be flawed ...

 

:NiceThread1:


  • 0



#142 status - Horse Muffins

status - Horse Muffins
  • Guests

Posted 08 January 2018 - 09:15 PM

:chuckle:

 

Logical fallacy leads us right into cognitive bias. In fact fallacy creates bias of all kinds. The trick in alleviating any confusion created is to ask yourself which bias' apply to your own opinion. That is if you're willing to admit your own thinking may be flawed ...

 

:NiceThread1:

 

That means taking time for a little self discovery.
 
Are you the main character of the story of your life?
How many diapers have you changed?
What if all the cognitive bias' are like a novel going on in your head?

I suppose a famous novelist could have something great to say about the question at hand. I'd love to hear any of them.

Maybe it's something like creating characters to fit certain personas to carry on specific story lines in ones life: One for work, one for play, one for when you think no one is looking. As long as you manage to not lie to yourself (even with the characterizations) a certain sense of balance can be achieved.

Doing your own biography and dividing it up into different phases of your life helps to slow down emotional outbursts. Knowing your own triggers and their histories and creating characters for them shapes a new form of understanding within the self. Answering truthfully to yourself why others seemed to get in the way of an instant satisfaction or a personal agenda. The stages, the ups and downs, and everything sideways and in between that comes with being too selfish.

I think understanding your own personal history helps to listen to another's POV with a more patient bearing. Contingent upon being totally honest with yourself....at least. Very hard thing to do in this world filled with chains of desires and addictions to numerous to count. Never lie to yourself.

Honesty with others? That depends on so many factors working together. Tricky Dicky, Murphy and his cohorts, and Finnegans wake always get in the way. How many times does a person screw themselves in life by hurting another?

I guess learning to be a narrator in the story of your life helps bring a balance to things. After all, it is just A story. One of many. Is it a good one? Is the hidden diary of your heart honest? Or is just told with fancy jargon and bloated juxtaposition bringing the victor (yourself) all the spoils of triumph without paying a price. Sanitizing the tale for future generations to follow and possibly emulate. What lies we tell ourselves to make it all better.

How many monuments to the self in history have been erected?
How many of them do we look up to still or even remember?
How many are we going to tear down?
What about our own personal monuments to ourselves?

They offer an array of satire to describe all sorts of ludicrous nonsense from politics to the small things in everyday life. Including everybody involved in our own little worlds. Don't forget about the giant individuals of influence who affect all our everyday lives. Their ssspheres of influence are large. Still, many more are beginning to pay attention to the larger worlds around them. Especially through the internet. The influences that control our lives. Layer by layer. The little ones, the big ones. Right on up to the top of the pyramid....grouped in categories to better serve you.
 
 
:chuckle:
 
 

  • 0

#143 Rufus Tullius

Rufus Tullius

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 08 January 2018 - 10:05 PM

:bumpsmall:

 

:falling_leaves3:

 

:popcorn:


  • 0

#144 Rufus Tullius

Rufus Tullius

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 14 January 2018 - 12:43 PM

 

How can I make a thread of this nature without including metaphors?
 
Metaphors are one of the most common types of speech. They add a sort of definition and color because they describe a comparison between two things that are most often apart except for a common characteristic that can link the two together. A noun or a verb can be described as something different. 
 
An example comparing a chef to a writer. Learning to write can be visualized with cooking skills. One must learn to bake, roast, chop, and cut. Including all the little things that go with it through practice and experience. They're great for sharpening the imagination and to give further understanding in communicating ideas 
 
Metaphors are different from similes in that they don't use terms like "like" or "as" to compare two things. Metaphors make hidden comparisons. Portraying one thing as being something else but not that something else. There is an implied implicit meaning.
 
animals-fox-chicken_farm-poultry_farms-i
 
:chuckle:

 

 

 

 

Irony is a literary technique & rhetoric device that has been used for many years in speech, art and everyday life. Although irony has been used for a long time, there hasn’t been an exact definition of irony. There have been hundreds of definitions suggested over the years, however, a general consensus is that:
 
Irony is a figure of speech which is a contradiction or incongruity between what is expected and what actually occurs.
 
Most of the definitions of irony are something along these lines, though there is often disagreement about the specific meaning of this term.
 
 
:Grin8:

 

 

:bumpsmall:

 

Reading between the lines of Irony...

 

http://forum.chicken...eading/?p=13322

 

:happy:


  • 2

#145 status - Guest

status - Guest
  • Guests

Posted 27 January 2018 - 12:34 PM

 

That means taking time for a little self discovery.
 
Are you the main character of the story of your life?
How many diapers have you changed?
What if all the cognitive bias' are like a novel going on in your head?

I suppose a famous novelist could have something great to say about the question at hand. I'd love to hear any of them.

Maybe it's something like creating characters to fit certain personas to carry on specific story lines in ones life: One for work, one for play, one for when you think no one is looking. As long as you manage to not lie to yourself (even with the characterizations) a certain sense of balance can be achieved.

Doing your own biography and dividing it up into different phases of your life helps to slow down emotional outbursts. Knowing your own triggers and their histories and creating characters for them shapes a new form of understanding within the self. Answering truthfully to yourself why others seemed to get in the way of an instant satisfaction or a personal agenda. The stages, the ups and downs, and everything sideways and in between that comes with being too selfish.

I think understanding your own personal history helps to listen to another's POV with a more patient bearing. Contingent upon being totally honest with yourself....at least. Very hard thing to do in this world filled with chains of desires and addictions to numerous to count. Never lie to yourself.

Honesty with others? That depends on so many factors working together. Tricky Dicky, Murphy and his cohorts, and Finnegans wake always get in the way. How many times does a person screw themselves in life by hurting another?

I guess learning to be a narrator in the story of your life helps bring a balance to things. After all, it is just A story. One of many. Is it a good one? Is the hidden diary of your heart honest? Or is just told with fancy jargon and bloated juxtaposition bringing the victor (yourself) all the spoils of triumph without paying a price. Sanitizing the tale for future generations to follow and possibly emulate. What lies we tell ourselves to make it all better.

How many monuments to the self in history have been erected?
How many of them do we look up to still or even remember?
How many are we going to tear down?
What about our own personal monuments to ourselves?

They offer an array of satire to describe all sorts of ludicrous nonsense from politics to the small things in everyday life. Including everybody involved in our own little worlds. Don't forget about the giant individuals of influence who affect all our everyday lives. Their ssspheres of influence are large. Still, many more are beginning to pay attention to the larger worlds around them. Especially through the internet. The influences that control our lives. Layer by layer. The little ones, the big ones. Right on up to the top of the pyramid....grouped in categories to better serve you.
 
 
:chuckle:
 
 

 

 

Dealing with the teetering and tottering of the balancing act better:

 

QctJffY.gif

 

:dovepeace:


  • 0

#146 status - Twileet

status - Twileet
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2018 - 12:58 PM

 

Do you speak legalize? 
 
How about professions in business, medicine, or the military? 
 
Each of these have their own language. This is known as Jargon.  Communication within professional fields include their own types of hidden meanings and special understandings. Terms and phrases are usually created to describe their own type of language. Acronyms can be considered jargon because it was developed for the internet.
 
Slang, on the other hand, is an informal language that develops inside groups and communities. It can be used to identify members inside the zone of influence. Every group around the world uses slang and it is mostly spoken not written.
 

 

:Egg-icon:

 

 

argot-1.jpg

 

:chuckle:

 


  • 0

#147 status - KDnS

status - KDnS
  • Guests

Posted 23 February 2018 - 06:45 PM

 

The art of argumentation can be used against those who don't appreciate it's forms and structure as an art for distraction.
 
Skillful argumentation is an antidote to productive communication.  It offers a way to eliminate bickering, anger, fear, and all the trash that prevents decent control of oneself. It's both an informal and formal method of debate leading to agreement by examining claims and justification by focusing on the interaction of argument, Itself!.
 
I'd like to think humanity has upgraded itself since Homer, Aristotle, and the countless others who began the art of conversation. Setting conditions of claims and evidence and shifting it all around with inference and warrants. The whole point of reasonable argument is to look for resolution.  This only works, of course, with reasonable people. Closed minds and using physical force can obviously kill any argument, anytime!

 

 

 

:Grin8:

 

Five star thread OP!

 

:hangingfromastar:   :hangingfromastar:   :hangingfromastar:   :hangingfromastar:   :hangingfromastar:

 

 

Ethos, Pathos, and Logos

 
Rhetorical appeals and their uses:
 
Ethos refers to how trust worthy a person is. Ethos is used to appeal to a moral philosophy or reliable integrity. It attempts to signify credibility within the speaker.  It is effective as a strategy because it automatically inserts belief in the speakers credibility because of a higher educational or moral being. A doctor is good example. People hold a doctors power of reasoning in high regard. Same with a judge because a certain trust is automatically implied. It can used to challenge the reliability or moral stance in an argument. 
 
Pathos is another powerful device. They appeal to emotions. It's always loaded with vivid illustrations that trigger emotional buttons. The speaker wants the listener or reader to be persuaded by the emotional value this type of argument can generate. Packed with sympathy and empathy they dim the analytical processing of rational thought. The more people react to this type of rhetoric the more they become least likely to ask the big question(s). Like WHY? In many instances they're used in calls to action within a group or society.
 
Logos denotes an appeal to logic and reasoning. Logos is tricky because it relies on theories and abstract language. They include definitions, factual data, and statistics. Including learned comments by authoritative sources and Ethos driven opinions. Logos tries to give the best sources and reasoning. Appeals are taken as matter of facts and are useful in persuading others to believe a conclusion. 
 
 

ethos--pathos--logos.png


  • 0

#148 Rufus Tullius

Rufus Tullius

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 01 March 2018 - 06:50 PM

 

Great thread idea OP. Looking up examples about this subject I noticed most of the videos about specific fallacies are made in India. Maybe that's just the cookie monster feeding me free samples...
 
:chuckle:
 
This one involves a little thinking. It gives a decent explanation of syllogisms.
 
Systematically solve any syllogism problem within a minute without using Venn diagram. This method is called Aristotle's method and it is highly effective, just like solving two mathematical equation.
 
 
 

 

 

Chaining syllogisms together can lead an audience wherever the writer wants them to go. But, what about when the first premise of a syllogism is only implied or outright suppressed? Sort of like a quasi-trust: only two elements can speak a time? That is an Enthymeme. Suppressing the first premise in a syllogism doesn't necessarily weaken the claim. It only works if it's something everyone can agree on.

An enthymeme is hard hitting and in your face because it asks the question "Can we at least agree on this...". Knowing your audience helps to identify whether or not to use an enthymeme. If you can get your audience to agree right off the bat then a narrator can string along the audience to agree on just about anything. By using effective jargon, tricky alliteration and fancy witticisms; this sends the audience soaring with cadences of rhetorical sounds waving directly to the brain. If an 'actor' can start with an effective enthymeme, and use logic in a correct manner, the audience can be led to a conclusion through the force of logic alone. Even if the conclusion is ridiculous.

Finding effective enthymemes in smaller groups is much easier to do than larger ones. Simply because not all the larger movements of thought can agree on any premise whatsoever.

Remember Rodney King? "...can't we all just get along?"

Not everyone wants to 'get along'...

With any major political theme it's virtually impossible to find a common enthymeme to start a coalescence towards agreement. Suppressing premises are the name of the political, scientific, and even the religious games being foisted on the public. This has always been done since the days when rhetoric was first thought up. Using the basic syllogism and constructing our thinking process' to find answers is a foundational point that people should never forget.

The hardest part to finding an all inclusive enthymeme: Figuring out where the shared assumptions are, even from a hostile audience, is the key to opening doors to civil conversations that result in agreeable conclusions.

An enthymeme is only a starting point. All arguments start with them but watch the longer chain of logic that follows. Watching the argument as a whole will help you figure out where things don't fit. But, it's a two edged sword to say the least. Devious fuckery is always afoot:

"if it doesn't fit, you must acquit"

oj.jpg

:chuckle:

If you want to know more about how an effective speaker can get through to a hostile audience check out the speech MLK gave in Birmingham. He brought them all into his sway simply because there was "injustice in Birmingham".

 

What is the suppressed first premise...

 

???

 

:dovepeace:              

               :Egg-icon:



 


  • 2

#149 Rufus Tullius

Rufus Tullius

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 03 March 2018 - 11:35 AM

Might as well add a bit about how arguments are constructed:

 

Building the foundations...
 
Rules of Logic
 
These can be tricky only because it takes a little time and effort to think about it. But, once you get it down and practice what to look for it becomes natural. Rules of logic are the foundation to build ideas and convince others of their worthiness. They are tried and true tools in building any argument. Think of it as plain and simple mathematics because it's built on a foundation of arithmetic.
 
Identity: A = A (a thing the same as itself) 
 
If/Then: If it's raining, then it is cloudy. If something is a fish, then it lives underwater.
 
Negation: -A = -A or NOT A = NOT A (this adds a negative or a NOT to support a negation of what was said before.) This is called an inversion
 
This is where it gets a bit tricky. Because if it's NOT raining, then the sky is NOT cloudy. Right?
 
Not necessarily so.
 
1.jpg
 
Try it with the fish statement: If it's NOT a fish, then it does NOT live underwater. Again, not necessarily true...
 
8709852-3x2-940x627.jpg
 
The Converse: Let the confusion begin - This is where the math gets weird. Because logical statements have a tendency to change directions. The order of the IF/THEN statement makes all the difference. 'If' A 'then' B is true, 'if' B 'then' A is NOT necessarily true. With that in mind try switching it around.
 
"IF the sky is cloudy, THEN it is raining" or 
"IF it lives in the water, THEN it is a fish"
 
Not true! 
 
A common fallacy in converse is Asserting the Consequent. Very hard to avoid because it works on the ignorant when a speaker or writer of a true converse statement assumes it IS automatically true.

Statement: IF it is a fish, THEN it lives under water.
Converse: IF it lives under water, THEN it is a fish

Not true!

Another related common fallacy is Denying the Antecedent. Instead of automatically assuming the converse is true, the inverse is true. *Reminder: inverse is a true statement that puts NOT on both sides of the IF/THEN statement.

Statement: IF it is a fish, THEN it lives under water.
Inverse: If it is NOT a fish, then it does NOT live underwater.

Not true!

How about this fallacy: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc or "the post hoc fallacy". This one assumes cause and effect: Because something comes after something else the first thing is the cause of the second. Using a coincidence as the effect for a cause is common among politicians: "since I've been in office the economy has take an upswing". Is this really true?

Not necessary so!
 
How about adding some more fuel to the fire and see if we can find the truth of the matter.
 
Contrapositive: Invert and convert - If you add NOT to both sides of the if/then statement AND switch the order (converse) we do get something that is true. 
 
IF the sky is NOT cloudy, THEN it is NOT raining.
IF it does NOT live underwater, THEN it is NOT a fish.
 
True!
 
Now, what happens when we chain a collection of IF/THEN statements together?
 
 
Syllogisms: This is the basic structure that all arguments are based on. It is a collection of multiple IF A, THEN B statements. A conclusion of one THEN statement is the IF of another and so on and so forth. It underlies all construction of argumentation. Whether good or bad. You start with one thing and chain other things together with it. This is called traditional or Aristotelian logic. Something that our modern logical society doesn't really think about anymore. Except for English professors, lawyers, politicians, and corporate marketing executives. 
 
Maybe I'm being a bit harsh by including English majors with the lawyers and politicians...
 
Or am I?
 
:chuckle:

  • 1

#150 Ghosty McFly

Ghosty McFly

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 270 posts

Posted 04 March 2018 - 11:57 AM

:chuckle:

 

Logical fallacy leads us right into cognitive bias. In fact fallacy creates bias of all kinds. The trick in alleviating any confusion created is to ask yourself which bias' apply to your own opinion. That is if you're willing to admit your own thinking may be flawed ...

 

:NiceThread1:

 

The Thinking Cure

For millennia, philosophers have understood that we don’t see life as it is; we see a version distorted by our hopes, fears, and other attachments. The Buddha said, “Our life is the creation of our mind.” Marcus Aurelius said, “Life itself is but what you deem it.” The quest for wisdom in many traditions begins with this insight. Early Buddhists and the Stoics, for example, developed practices for reducing attachments, thinking more clearly, and finding release from the emotional torments of normal mental life.

Cognitive behavioral therapy is a modern embodiment of this ancient wisdom. It is the most extensively studied nonpharmaceutical treatment of mental illness, and is used widely to treat depression, anxiety disorders, eating disorders, and addiction. It can even be of help to schizophrenics. No other form of psychotherapy has been shown to work for a broader range of problems. Studies have generally found that it is as effective as antidepressant drugs (such as Prozac) in the treatment of anxiety and depression. The therapy is relatively quick and easy to learn; after a few months of training, many patients can do it on their own. Unlike drugs, cognitive behavioral therapy keeps working long after treatment is stopped, because it teaches thinking skills that people can continue to use.

The goal is to minimize distorted thinking and see the world more accurately. You start by learning the names of the dozen or so most common cognitive distortions (such as overgeneralizing, discounting positives, and emotional reasoning; see the list at the bottom of this article). Each time you notice yourself falling prey to one of them, you name it, describe the facts of the situation, consider alternative interpretations, and then choose an interpretation of events more in line with those facts. Your emotions follow your new interpretation. In time, this process becomes automatic. When people improve their mental hygiene in this way—when they free themselves from the repetitive irrational thoughts that had previously filled so much of their consciousness—they become less depressed, anxious, and angry.

The parallel to formal education is clear: cognitive behavioral therapy teaches good critical-thinking skills, the sort that educators have striven for so long to impart. By almost any definition, critical thinking requires grounding one’s beliefs in evidence rather than in emotion or desire, and learning how to search for and evaluate evidence that might contradict one’s initial hypothesis. But does campus life today foster critical thinking? Or does it coax students to think in more-distorted ways?

The expansive use of trigger warnings may also foster unhealthy mental habits in the vastly larger group of students who do not suffer from PTSD or other anxiety disorders. People acquire their fears not just from their own past experiences, but from social learning as well. If everyone around you acts as though something is dangerous—elevators, certain neighborhoods, novels depicting racism—then you are at risk of acquiring that fear too. The psychiatrist Sarah Roff pointed this out last year in an online article for The Chronicle of Higher Education. “One of my biggest concerns about trigger warnings,” Roff wrote, “is that they will apply not just to those who have experienced trauma, but to all students, creating an atmosphere in which they are encouraged to believe that there is something dangerous or damaging about discussing difficult aspects of our history.”
The new climate is slowly being institutionalized, and is affecting what can be said in the classroom, even as a basis for discussion or debate.

https://www.theatlan...an-mind/399356/
 


  • 0

7mDFXjl.gif




Reply to this topic



  



Similar Topics Collapse


Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: common fears

IPB Skin By Virteq