Title: Theory / Unimportant / Human / Thought / Biais
Tags: fromDeuxSens biases fallacies logic cognitive-bias DecisionMakingOrBehavioralBias examplesSwitchExample1 BiasesInProbabilityAndBelief SocialBias MemoryBias StoryArchtype prefix

Name: Bias blind spot
Definition: the tendency not to compensate for one's own cognitive biases.
Page: y
Context: decision-making or behavioral bias

Name: Choice-supportive bias
Definition: the tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were.
Page: y
Context: memory bias

Name: Congruence bias
Definition: the tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, in contrast to tests of possible alternative hypotheses.
Page: y

Name: Contrast effect
Definition: the enhancement or diminishing of a weight or other measurement when compared with a recently observed object.
Page: y

Name: Déformation professionnelle
Definition: the tendency to look at things according to the conventions of one's own profession, forgetting any broader point of view.
Page: y

Name: Denomination effect
Definition: the tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g. coins) than large amounts (e.g. bills).
Page: y

Name: Distinction bias
Definition: the tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately.
Page: y

Name: Experimenter's bias
Definition: the tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment.
Page: y
Name2: Expectation bias

Name: Extraordinarity bias
Definition: valuing an object more due to an exceptional feature that does not, in itself, change the value.
Page: y

Name: Focusing effect
Definition: prediction bias: when too much importance is placed on one aspect of an event
Page: y

Name: Hyperbolic discounting
Definition: People prefer immediate payoffs to delayed payoffs, with increasing tendency the nearer both payoffs are.
Page: y

Name: Illusion of control
Definition: the tendency for human beings to believe they can control or at least influence outcomes that they clearly cannot.
Page: y

Name: Impact bias
Definition: the tendency for people to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling states.
Page: y

Name: Information bias
Definition: the tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action.
Page: y

Name: Interloper effect
Definition: the tendency to value third party consultation as objective, confirming, and without motive.
Page: y

Name: Irrational escalation
Definition: the tendency to make irrational decisions based upon rational decisions in the past or to justify actions already taken.
Page: y

Name: Just-world phenomenon
Definition: Blaming the victim.
Page: y

Name: Money illusion
Definition: the tendency of people to concentrate on the nominal (face value) of money rather than its value in terms of purchasing power.
Page: y

Name: Moral credential effect
Definition: the tendency of a track record of non-prejudice to increase subsequent prejudice.
Page: y

Name: Need for Closure
Definition: the need to reach a verdict in important matters; to have an answer and to escape the feeling of doubt and uncertainty. The personal context (time or social pressure) might increase this bias.
Page: y

Name: Negativity bias
Definition: phenomenon by which humans pay more attention to and give more weight to negative than positive experiences or other kinds of information.
Page: y

Name: Neglect of probability
Definition: the tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty.
Page: y

Name: Normalcy bias
Definition: the refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before.
Page: y

Name: Not Invented Here
Definition: the tendency to ignore that a product or solution already exists, because its source is seen as an "enemy" or as "inferior".
Page: y

Name: Outcome bias
Definition: the tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the quality of the decision at the time it was made.
Page: y

Name: Post-purchase rationalization
Definition: the tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was a good value.
Page: y

Name: Pseudocertainty effect
Definition: risk-averse choices if outcome is positive
risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes.
Page: y

Name: Reactance
Definition: the urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice.
Page: y

Name: Restraint bias
Definition: the tendency to overestimate one's ability to resist temptation.
Page: y

Name: Selective perception
Definition: the tendency for expectations to affect perception.
Page: y

Name: Zero-risk bias
Definition: preference for reducing a small risk to zero over a greater reduction in a larger risk.
Page: y

Name: Anchoring effect
Definition: the tendency to rely too heavily on a past reference or on one trait or piece of information when making decisions (also called "insufficient adjustment").
Page: y

Name: Attentional bias
Definition: neglect of relevant data when making judgments of a correlation or association.
Page: y

Name: Authority bias
Definition: the tendency to value an ambiguous stimulus (e.g., an art performance) according to the opinion of someone who is seen as an authority on the topic.
Page: y

Name: Availability cascade
Definition: "repeat something long enough and it will become true"
Page: y

Name: Belief bias
Definition: an effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion.
Page: y

Name: Clustering illusion
Definition: the tendency to see patterns where actually none exist. (pareidolia)
Page: y

Name: Capability bias
Definition: The tendency to believe that the closer average performance is to a target, the tighter the distribution of the data set.
Page: y

Name: Disposition effect
Definition: the tendency to sell assets that have increased in value but hold assets that have decreased in value.
Page: y

Name: Illusory correlation
Definition: beliefs that inaccurately suppose a relationship between a certain type of action and an effect.
Page: y

Name: Ludic fallacy
Definition: the analysis of chance-related problems according to the belief that the unstructured randomness found in life resembles the structured randomness found in games, ignoring the non-gaussian distribution of many real-world results.
Page: y

Name: Observer-expectancy effect
Definition: when a researcher expects a given result and unconsciously manipulates an experiment or misinterprets data in order to find it.
Page: y

Name: Optimism bias
Definition: the systematic tendency to be over-optimistic about the outcome of planned actions.
Page: y

Name: Positive outcome bias
Definition: prediction: overestimating the probability of good things happening.
Page: y

Name: Pareidolia
Definition: Interpreting noise as significant
Page: y

Name: Primacy effect
Definition: the tendency to weigh initial events more than subsequent events.
Page: y

Name: Recency effect
Definition: the tendency to weigh recent events more than earlier events.
Page: y

Name: Disregard of regression toward the mean
Definition: the tendency to expect extreme performance to continue.
Page: y

Name: Selection bias
Definition: a distortion of evidence or data that arises from the way that the data are collected.
Page: y

Name: Stereotyping
Definition: expecting a member of a group to have certain characteristics without having actual information about that individual.
Page: y

Name: Subadditivity effect
Definition: the tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts.
Page: y

Name: Subjective validation
Definition: perception that something is true because a belief demands it to be true,
e.g. belief in psychic powers
assigning perceived connections between coincidences.
Page: y

Name: Telescoping effect
Definition: the effect that recent events appear to have occurred more remotely and remote events appear to have occurred more recently.
Page: y

Name: Texas sharpshooter fallacy
Definition: the fallacy of selecting or adjusting a hypothesis after the data is collected, making it impossible to test the hypothesis fairly.
Page: y

Name: Well travelled road effect
Definition: underestimation of the duration taken to traverse oft-travelled routes and over-estimate the duration taken to traverse less familiar routes.
Page: y

Name: Egocentric bias
Definition: occurs when people claim more responsibility for themselves for the results of a joint action than an outside observer would./recalling the past in a self-serving manner, e.g. remembering one's exam grades as being better than they were, or remembering a caught fish as being bigger than it was
Page: y

Name: Forer effect (aka Barnum Effect)
Definition: Perceiving vague personality qualifiers as highly accurate
Page: y

Name: False consensus effect
Definition: the tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them.
Page: y

Name: Fundamental attribution error
Definition: The tendency to explain other's behavior dispositionally and ignore situational factors.
Page: y

Name: Halo effect
Definition: the tendency for a person's positive or negative traits to "spill over" from one area of their personality to another in others' perceptions of them (see also physical attractiveness stereotype).
Page: y

Name: Herd instinct
Definition: Common tendency to adopt the opinions and follow the behaviors of the majority to feel safer and to avoid conflict.
Page: y

Name: Illusion of asymmetric insight
Definition: people perceive their knowledge of their peers to surpass their peers' knowledge of them.
Page: y

Name: Illusion of transparency
Definition: people overestimate others' ability to know them, and they also overestimate their ability to know others.
Page: y

Name: Illusory superiority
Definition: overestimating one's desirable qualities, and underestimating undesirable qualities
AKA "Lake Wobegon effect"
Page: y

Name: Ingroup bias
Definition: the tendency for people to give preferential treatment to others they perceive to be members of their own groups.
Page: y

Name: Just-world phenomenon
Definition: the belief that people "get what they deserve."
Page: y

Name: Notational bias
Definition: a form of cultural bias in which the notational conventions of recording data biases the appearance of that data toward (or away from) the system upon which the notational schema is based.
Page: y

Name: Outgroup homogeneity bias
Definition: individuals see members of their own group as being relatively more varied than members of other groups.
Page: y

Name: Projection bias
Definition: the tendency to unconsciously assume that others share the same or similar thoughts, beliefs, values, or positions.
Page: y

Name: Self-serving bias (also called "behavioral confirmation effect")
Definition: the tendency to claim more responsibility for successes than failures.
Page: y

Name: Self-fulfilling prophecy
Definition: the tendency to engage in behaviors that elicit results which will (consciously or not) confirm existing attitudes.
Page: y

Name: System justification
Definition: the tendency to defend and bolster the status quo.
Page: y

Name: Trait ascription bias
Definition: the tendency for people to view themselves as relatively variable in terms of personality, behavior and mood while viewing others as much more predictable.
Page: y

Name: Consistency bias
Definition: incorrectly remembering one's past attitudes and behaviour as resembling present attitudes and behaviour.
Page: y

Name: Cryptomnesia
Definition: where a memory is mistaken for imagination.
Page: y

Name: False memory
Definition: confusion of imagination with memory, or the dismissal of true memories.
Page: y

Name: Hindsight bias
Definition: filtering memory of past events through present knowledge, so that those events look more predictable than they actually were.
Page: y

Name: Reminiscence bump
Definition: the effect that people tend to recall more personal events from adolescence and early adulthood than from other lifetime periods.
Page: y

Name: Rosy retrospection
Definition: the tendency to rate past events more positively than they had actually rated them when the event occurred.
Page: y

Name: Self-serving bias
Definition: perceiving oneself responsible for desirable outcomes but not responsible for undesirable ones.
Page: y

Name: Suggestibility
Definition: a form of misattribution where ideas suggested by a questioner are mistaken for memory
Page: y

Name: Framing
Definition: Using an approach or description of the situation or issue that is too narrow.
Page: y
Context: decision-making or behavioral bias

Name: Ultimate attribution error
Definition: a person is likely to make an internal attribution to an entire group instead of the individuals within the group.
see also: representative heuristic
Page: y

Name: Appeal to possibility
Definition: assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen.
eg Murphy's Law
Page: y

Name: Argument from fallacy
Definition: if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion is fallacious.
Page: y

Name: Denying the correlative
Definition: Attempting to introduce alternatives where there are none.
e.g. All apples are either green or not, but what about apples that are both green and red?
Page: y

Name: Suppressed correlative
Definition: where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible.
Page: y

Name: If-by-whiskey
Definition: An argument that supports both sides of an issue by using terms that are selectively emotionally sensitive.
Page: y

Name: Is-ought problem
Definition: because something is one way, it should be.
Page: y

Name: Homunculus fallacy
Definition: where a "middle-man" is used for explanation, this usually leads to regressive middle-man.
Page: y

Name: Masked man fallacy
Definition: the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one.
Page: y

Name: Naturalistic fallacy
Definition: a fallacy that claims that if something is natural, then it is good or right.
Page: y

Name: Nirvana fallacy
Definition: when solutions to problems are said not to be right because they are not perfect.
Page: y

Name: Negative proof fallacy
Definition: Claiming that
"No proof against X --> X is true"
or vice versa
Page: y

Name: Affirming a disjunct
Definition: A or B; A; therefore not B.
Page: y

Name: Existential fallacy
Definition: an argument has two universal premises and a particular conclusion, but the premises do not establish the truth of the conclusion, because the subject may not exist.
Page: y

Name: Proof by example
Definition: inductive proof for a universal proposition. ("This apple is red, therefore all apples are red.")
Page: y

Name: Quantifier shift
Definition: Everybody has something to believe in. Therefore, there is something that everybody believes in.
Page: y

Name: Fallacy of exclusive premises
Definition: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative.
Page: y

Name: Fallacy of four terms
Definition: Nothing is better than eternal happiness, and a ham sandwich is better than nothing, so a ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness.
Page: y

Name: Illicit major
Definition: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion. e.g. All dogs are mammals. No cats are dogs. Therefore, no cats are mammals.
Page: y

Name: Fallacy of the undistributed middle
Definition: All students carry backpacks. My grandfather carries a backpack. Therefore, my grandfather is a student.
Section: y

Name: Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam)
Definition: signifies that it has been discussed extensibly until nobody cares to discuss it anymore
Page: y

Name: Circular cause and consequence
Definition: where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause
Page: y

Name: Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard)
Definition: claiming that two conditions along a continuum are identical
Page: y

Name: latin for: Correlation does not imply causation
Definition: cum hoc ergo propter hoc
Page: y

Name: Demanding negative proof
Definition: attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim
Page: y

Name: Etymological fallacy
Definition: which reasons that the original or historical meaning of a word or phrase is necessarily similar to its actual present-day meaning.
Page: y

Name: Fallacy of many questions
Definition: Name: Asking loaded questions
Page: y

Name: Fallacy of the single cause ("joint effect", or "causal oversimplification")
Definition: assuming that there is one simple cause of an outcome.
Page: y

Name: False attribution
Definition: occurs when an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument
Page: y

Name: contextomy
Definition: name: Quoting someone out of context
Page: y

Name: False compromise/middle ground
Definition: asserts that a compromise between two positions is correct
Page: y

Name: Gambler's fallacy
Definition: the incorrect belief that the likelihood of a random event can be affected by or predicted from other, independent events/the tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by independent past events
Page: y

Name: Historian's fallacy
Definition: occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision.
Page: y

Name: Incomplete comparison
Definition: where not enough information is provided to make a comparison,
e.g. "product x is better than y" instead of "x sells for a lower price than y".
Page: y

Name: Inconsistent comparison
Definition: where different methods of comparison are used, leaving one with a false impression of the whole comparison
Page: y

Name: Intentional fallacy
Definition: the assumption that the meaning intended by the author of a literary work is of primary importance
Page: y

Name: Loki's Wager
Definition: the unreasonable insistence that a concept cannot be defined, and therefore cannot be discussed.
Page: y

Name: Moving the goalpost (raising the bar)
Definition: argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded
Page: y

Name: Perfect solution fallacy
Definition: assuming that a perfect solution exists or rejecting an incomplete solution
Page: y

Name: Prosecutor's fallacy
Definition: a low probability of false matches does not mean a low probability of some false match being found
Page: y

Name: Psychologist's fallacy
Definition: occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event
Page: y

Name: Regression fallacy
Definition: When regression to the mean is mistaken for cause and effect
Page: y

Name: Reification (hypostatization)
Definition: a fallacy of ambiguity, when an idea is treated as a real thing
Page: y

Name: Special pleading
Definition: where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption
Page: y

Name: Well travelled road effect
Definition: estimates of elapsed time is shorter for familiar routes as compared to unfamiliar routes which are of equal or lesser duration.
Page: y

Name: Wrong direction fallacy
Definition: where cause and effect are reversed. The cause is said to be the effect and vice versa.
Page: y

Name: Accident (fallacy)
Definition: when an exception to the generalization is ignored.
Page: y

Name: Cherry picking
Definition: act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position
Page: y

Name: Composition
Definition: where one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some (or even every) part of the whole
Page: y

Name: False analogy
Definition: consists of an error in the substance of an argument (the content of the analogy itself), not an error in the logical structure of the argument
Page: y

Name: Overwhelming exception
Definition: An accurate generalization with such large exceptions so that it is much less impressive than the initial statement.
Page: y

Name: Pathetic fallacy
Definition: when an inanimate object is declared to have characteristics of animate objects
Page: y

Name: Thought-terminating cliché
Definition: a commonly used phrase, sometimes passing as folk wisdom, used to quell cognitive dissonance. E.g. "drugs are bad"
Page: y

Name: Association fallacy
Definition: name: guilt by association
Page: y

Name: Appeal to authority
Definition: where an assertion is deemed true because of the reputation of the person asserting it
Page: y

Name: Appeal to fear
Definition: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side
Page: y

Name: Appeal to motive
Definition: dismissing a premise by calling into question the desires of the proposer
Page: y

Name: Appeal to nature
Definition: an *argument* wherein something is deemed correct or good if it is natural, and is deemed incorrect or bad if it is unnatural
Page: y

Name: Appeal to poverty (argumentum ad lazarum)
Definition: thinking the conclusion is effected by a party's poor financial situation.
Page: y

Name: Appeal to wealth (argumentum ad crumenam)
Definition: concluding that a statement's truth value is affected by a party's financial situation.
Page: y

Name: Argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio)
Definition: a conclusion based on lack of contrary evidence
Page: y

Name: Chronological snobbery
Definition: where a thesis is deemed incorrect because it was commonly held when something else, clearly false, was also commonly held
Page: y

Name: Judgmental language
Definition: insultive or pejorative language to influence the recipient's judgment
Page: y

Name: Sentimental fallacy
Definition: it would be more pleasant if; therefore it ought to be; therefore - it is
Page: y

Name: Style over substance fallacy
Definition: emphasizing the way in which the argument is presented while marginalizing the content of the argument
Page: y

Name: Two wrongs make a right
Definition: occurs when it is assumed that if one wrong is committed, another wrong will cancel it out
Page: y

Name: Tu quoque
Definition: the argument states that a certain position is false or wrong and/or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position
Page: y

Name: Luddite fallacy
Definition: related to the belief that labour-saving technologies increase unemployment by reducing demand for labour
Page: y

Name: Broken window fallacy
Definition: an argument which disregards hidden costs associated with destroying property of others.
Page: y

Name: Origin of the phrase "Semmelweis reflex"
Definition: A doctor who was outcast because he advocated hand washing in hospitals
Page: y

Name: Bandwagon effect
Definition: the tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behaviour.

Name: Bias blind spot
Definition: the tendency not to compensate for one's own cognitive biases.

Name: Choice-supportive bias
Definition: The tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were.

Name: Endowment effect
Definition: the fact that people often demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it.

Name: Von Restorff effect
Definition: the tendency for an item that "stands out like a sore thumb" to be more likely to be remembered than other items.
More likely to be remembered than other items. A bias in favour of remembering the unusual

Name: Ambiguity effect
Definition: People tend to select options for which the probability of a favorable outcome is known, over an option for which the probability of a favorable outcome is unknown.
Example: I know that there is at best a moderate chance of my winning a local singing competition as the local singers are good. There is a competition in the next town but I do not know how good the singers are there. Rather than 'risk it' I just enter for the local competition.
Example2: You are given the opportunity to win money in a lottery. The lottery consists
of two boxes. One box contains 50 black and 50 white balls, the other box also
contains 100 black and white balls but in an unknown composition. Suppose a
ball is randomly drawn from one box and you receive $100 if the ball is black.
Which box would you bet on? Suppose now the ball is returned to its box and
another ball is drawn at random from one of these boxes. This time you would
receive $100 if the ball is white. Which box would you bet on?
Most people pick the 50/50 in both cases
preferring the 50/50 box for both bets Ð regardless of whether
your goal is to draw black or white Ð involves a contradiction. Moreover, it
commits one to the view that the subjective probabilities assigned to the ambiguous
box for white and black are each less than 0.5, which means they sum to less than 1:
a conclusion that violates the Additivity axiom.

Name: Neglect of prior base rates effect
Definition: the tendency to neglect known odds when reevaluating odds in light of weak evidence.

Name: Appeal to Law
Definition: an argument which implies that legislation is a moral imperative.

Name: Fallacy of necessity
Definition: a degree of unwarranted inevitability is placed in the conclusion based on the inevitability of its premises.
A logical fallacy in a syllogism where necessity is stated in the conclusion and necessity is not stated in both the premises.
Example: P1. We must reduce the number of car accidents on this road.
P2. There would be no car accidents if we closed the road.
C. Therefore we must close the road.
In this example, the conclusion C is false because it ignores other, obvious ways of reducing the number of car accidents.

Name: Correlation does not imply causation
Definition: A occurs in correlation with B.
Therefore, A causes B.
causation is a subset of correlation
Example: Sleeping with one's shoes on is strongly correlated with waking up with a headache.
Therefore, sleeping with one's shoes on causes headache.
The above example commits the correlation-implies-causation fallacy, as it prematurely concludes that sleeping with one's shoes on causes headache. A more plausible explanation is that both are caused by a third factor, in this case going to bed drunk, which thereby gives rise to a correlation.

Name: Demanding negative proof
Definition: Attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim.
Problem: The burden of proof of a statement typically should be fulfilled by whoever makes the claim

Name: Retrospective determinism
Definition: it happened, so it was bound to.
Example: When he declared himself dictator of the Roman Republic, Julius Caesar was bound to be assassinated.

Name: Misleading vividness
Definition: Problem: the mere fact that an event is particularly vivid or dramatic does not make the event more likely to occur, especially in the face of significant statistical evidence.
1. Dramatic or vivid event X occurs (and is not in accord with the majority of the statistical evidence)
2. Therefore events of type X are likely to occur.
People often accept this sort of "reasoning" because particularly vivid or dramatic cases tend to make a very strong impression on the human mind.
Be aware: If he knows that, statistically, the chances of the accident are happening are very low but he considers even a small risk to be unnacceptable, then he would not be making an error in reasoning.
Example: Joe: "When I was flying back to school, the pilot came on the intercom and told us that the plane was having engine trouble. I looked out the window and I saw smoke billowing out of the engine nearest me. We had to make an emergency landing and there were fire trucks everywhere. I had to spend the next six hours sitting in the airport waiting for a flight. I was lucky I didn't die! I'm never flying again."
Drew: "So how are you going to get home over Christmas break?"
Joe: "I'm going to drive. That will be a lot safer than flying."
Drew: "I don't think so. You are much more likely to get injured or killed driving than flying."
Joe: "I don't buy that! You should have seen the smoke pouring out of that engine! I'm never getting on one of those death traps again!"
Example2: Anne: "I am giving up extreme sports now that I have children. I think I will take up golf."
Bill: "I wouldn't do that. Do you remember Charles? He was playing golf when he got hit by a golf-cart. It broke his leg, and he fell over, giving himself a concussion. He was in hospital for a week and still walks with a limp. I would stick to paragliding!"

Name: Bare assertion fallacy
Definition: premise in an argument is assumed to be true purely because it says that it is true.
Extra: Ne pas confonde avec base rate fallacy

Name: Base rate fallacy
Definition: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.
Definition2: ignoring available statistical data in favor of particulars.
Extra: Ne pas confonde avec bare assertion fallacy

Name: Package-deal fallacy
Definition: Assuming that things often grouped together by tradition or culture must always be grouped that way.
This argument need not be a fallacy when used to argue that things grouped by culture and tradition are likely to be grouped in a given way.
Example: My opponent is a conservative who voted against higher taxes and welfare, therefore he will also oppose gun control and abortion.
Example2: "John enjoys science fiction films, so chances are he'll enjoy Star Wars"

Name: Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise
Definition: Neg A => B, Neg B=>C, hence A=> C
Example: No fish are dogs, and no dogs can fly, therefore all fish can fly.
visualise with Venn diagrams- only true if fish is completely contained within the 'can fly' circle, which isn't true for this proposition (but would be closer for 'can breathe' underwater)

Name: Ecological fallacy
Definition: Inferences about individuals based solely upon statistics of the group
Example: A study is done that shows people from City A score higher on college entry exams, on average, than people from City B. This does not mean that a randomly selected individual from A will usually score higher than a randomly selected individual from B. This is because the distribution of scores might be very different between the cities. Consider this synthetic example:
City A: 80% of people got 40 points and 20% of them got 95 points. The average score is 51 points.
City B: 50% of people got 45 points and 50% got 55 points. The average score is 50 points.

Name: Proof by verbosity
Definition: Submission to an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its details.
Often a tactic used in formal speeches. If not all the many minor points introduced are not addressed by the opponent, the verbose contender will claim victory.
Example: Insomuch as it remains within our agency, it behooves us to eschew obfuscation, and espouse elucidation.

Name: No True Scotsman
Definition: When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim, rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule.
Example: Alice: All Scotsmen enjoy haggis.
Bob: My uncle is a Scotsman, and he doesn't like haggis!
Alice: Well, all true Scotsmen like haggis.

Name: Appeal to consequences
Definition: Judging a premise based on its results
Definition2: If P, then Q will occur.
Q is desirable.
Therefore, P is true.
Example: "Humans will travel faster than light: faster-than-light travel would be beneficial for space travel."

Name: Appeal to Emotion
Definition: where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning

Name: Wishful thinking
Definition: A specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason.
Example: "Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau", said a few weeks before the Stock Market Crash of 1929, which was followed by the Great Depression.

Name: Appeal to Spite
Definition: A specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness towards an opposing party. Attempt to sway the audience emotionally by associating a hate-figure with opposition to the speaker's argument.
Problem: a feeling of spite does not count as evidence for or against a claim
Example: "Stop recycling! Aren't you tired of Hollywood celebrities preaching to everyone about saving the Earth?"
Example2: Why should student benefits be reinstated, when I got nothing from the state and had to sacrifice to pay for my studies?
Example3: Bill: "I think that Jane did a great job this year. I'm going to nominate her for the award."
Dave: "Have you forgotten last year? Remember that she didn't nominate you last year."
Bill: "You're right. I'm not going to nominate her."

Name: Appeal to Wealth
Definition: Concluding that a statement's truth value is affected by a party's financial situation.
Example: Warren Buffett is hosting a seminar. This seminar is better than others, because Warren Buffett is richer than most people.
Name2: argumentum ad crumenam

Name: Semmelweis reflex
Definition: reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs or paradigms.
Intuition: He was a doctor who was outcast because he advocated hand washing in hospitals

Name: Availability heuristic
Definition: People tend to assess the probability, importance or size of something by the ease with which it comes to mind.

Name: Affect heuristic
Definition: Fast judgements and decisions are guided directly by subjective feelings of liking and disliking, with little deliberation on reasoning.
It can cause people to use one positive (or negative) fact about an object/action to judge the likely positivity or negativity of other facts about that object/action.
Example: An executive investing in Ford saying "boy do they make a good car" .. instead of analysing what counts which is whether the stock was undervalued.
Example2: for nuclear reactors, natural gas, and food preservatives, presenting information about high benefits made people perceive lower risks; presenting information about higher risks made people perceive lower benefits; and so on across the quadrants - despite these being seperate dimensions

Name: Principle of Least Effort
Definition: If there are several ways of achieving the same goal people will gravitate to the least demanding course of action.
Example: E.g. one might consult a generalist co-worker down the hall rather than a specialist in another building, so long as the generalist's answers were within the threshold of acceptability.

Name: Gorilla Blindness
Definition: Not perceiving something since you are engaged with System 2
Example: E.g. A driver sometimes won't hear a word you say to him since he is concentrating on the road.

Name: Ego Depletion
Definition: If you have to force yourself to do something you are less likely to exert self control when the next challenge comes along.
Example: A tired and hungry judge will be more likely to fall back on default Principle of Least Effort behaviour, which is denying parole.

Name: Priming Effect
Example: Votes for increasing funding in schools higher when polling station was in a school
Example2: If we read the word EAT then we are more likely to complete the fragment SO?P as SOUP than SOAP

Name: Halo Effect
Definition: Tendency to like or dislike everything about a person, including things not yet observed based, based on some positive or negative first impression.
Thus sequence you get information in matters.
Debiasing: Let's say that you know someone who not only seems very intelligent, but also honest, altruistic, kindly, and serene. You should be suspicious that some of these perceived characteristics are influencing your perception of the others. Maybe the person is genuinely intelligent, honest, and altruistic, but not all that kindly or serene.
Example: More attractive presidents tend to win elections. ( Despite such evidence of favoritism toward handsome politicians, follow-up research demonstrated that voters did not realize their bias. )
Example2: Good grooming of applicants in a simulated employment interview accounted for more favorable hiring decisions than did job qualifications
Example3: Good-looking people are likely to receive highly favorable treatment in the legal system

Name: Cognitive ease
Definition: If something is cognitively easy you will be more likely to believe something is true/good or be effortless to carry out.
If something is in an easy to read font, the idea is primed, you are in a good mood, you have had related experience/previous exposure.
Example: Stocks with prouncible trading symbols e.g. KAR outpeform tongue twisters like PXR.
Applied to: stock market

Name: Mere Exposure Effect
Definition: We like things simply for having seen them before.
Definition2: We are skeptical of the new and unfamiliar.
Example: Students shown random Turkish words were more likely to believe the one seen more often meant something good than the ones seen less often

Name: Confirmation Bias
Definition: Tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. They gather or remember information selectively, or interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs.
Example: Sixty people in turn were shown the same video clip on the same television. Half were told to expect clearer, sharper pictures thanks to HD technology: an impression backed up by posters, flyers and the presence of an extra-thick cable connected to the screen. The other half were told to expect a normal DVD image.
Questionnaires revealed that the people who had been led to expect HD reported seeing higher-quality images

Name: Framing Effects
Definition: Different ways of presenting the same information often invoke different reactions.
Example: Compare:
"Chances of survival are 90%"
with
"Mortality rate of 10%"

Name: Judgement Substitution Heuristic
Definition: In complex judgements, such as choosing a politician, people often refer to a simpler decision, such as do I like him.

Name: Regression To The Mean Blindness
Definition: Failing to take into account normal fluctations. The logical flaw is to make predictions that expect exceptional results to continue as if they were average. People are most likely to take action when variance is at its peak. Then after results become more normal they believe that their action was the cause of the change when in fact it was not causal.
Example: When his pain got worse, he went to a doctor, after which the pain subsided a little. Therefore, he benefited from the doctor's treatment.

Name: Hindsight Bias
Definition: It reflects a tendency to overestimate the foreseeability of an event after learning about the outcome.
subjects given information about X, and asked to assign a probability that X will happen, assign much lower probabilities than subjects who are given the same information about X, are told that X actually happened,
result: overly specific lessons instead of a sound general policy of precautions
4) Devalues science and researchers - this bias will lead us to systematically undervalue the surprisingness of scientific findings, especially the discoveries we understand—the ones that seem real to us, the ones we can retrofit into our models of the world.
Example: Imagine that you receive a letter from a publisher that states that the publisher is going to publish your short story. You tell a friend that you knew that they would publish it. However, the friend reminds you that before you received the letter, you had told him that you were very uncertain about whether the publisher would accept your short story for publication.
Example2: asked two groups to estimate the probability of flood damage caused by blockage of a city-owned drawbridge. The control group was told only the background information known to the city when it decided not to hire a bridge watcher. The experimental group was given this information, plus the fact that a flood had actually occurred. 76% of the control group concluded the flood was so unlikely that no precautions were necessary; 57% of the experimental group concluded the flood was so likely that failure to take precautions was legally negligent.

Name: Narative Fallacy
Definition: Our vulnerability to over-interpretation and our predilection for compact stories over raw truths. Makes the world seem less random than it is and gives a false sense of confidence in our understanding of the world.
Example: News said capture of Hussein caused stocks to rise.

Name: Sunk Cost Fallacy
Definition: The decision to invest additional resources in a losing account when better investments are available.
(They are retrospective costs that have already been incurred and cannot be recovered.)
Example: We will go to a movie we don't want to see because we had a non-refundable ticket. Had we no ticket bought we would not have went to the cinema.

Name: Negativity Dominance
Definition: Our motives to avoid losses are much larger than those to achieve gains.
Example: Golfers try harder when putting for par (to avoid a bogey) than when putting for a birdie.
Example2: Institutions fight uncharacteristically strongly against reforms that would shrink them or cause their members to get paid less.

Name: Certainty Effect
Definition: A probability of 95% is underweighted compared to 100% since people pay a premium for certainty.
Example: Parents would pay significantly more for insect spray that completely removed risks of child damage.

Name: Possibility Effect
Definition: Events with a probability of 5% get weighted more than they deserve compared to events with a probability of 0%.
Example: Knowing risk of gas explosion is tiny yet taking expensive precautions just for peace of mind.

Name: Probability prediction issue with single example rare event w/o alternatives
Definition: The probability of a rare event is likely to be overstated when the alternative is not fully specified.
Example: Students were asked which team will win the basketball tournament one team at a time and the total probabilities added up to 240%.

Name: Mental Accounting
Definition: We create separate mental accounts and categories for fungibles.
Example: I have a cash budget for luxury purchases, bills, eductation and so on... despite money being money. Similarly I might apply accounting to where I choose to spend my time.

Name: Affective Forecasting Effect
Definition: (It is the prediction of one's affect (emotional state) in the future.) The effect is our inability to do so accurately. In particular we overestimate the emotional impact of a future event, whether in terms of intensity or duration.
Example: Lottery win won't make us feel so good, nor a maiming so bad.

Name: Focusing Illusion
Definition: Nothing in life is as important as that what you are thinking about.
Example: Ask someone if the Californian weather makes them happy and they will say it does (since thinking about weather makes them happy). However they rarely do think about it once adjusted, and if you were just to ask them if they were happy they wouldn't be any more so that someone living in Alaska.

Name: Planning Fallacy
Definition: Plans are usually unrealistically close to best-case scenarios and do not consult statistics of similar cases.
Debias: Outside view is when you deliberately avoid thinking about the special, unique features of this project, and just ask how long it took to finish broadly similar projects in the past - same type and scale. Better yet, ask an experienced outsider how long similar projects have taken.
doesn't take into account unexpected delays and unforeseen catastrophes. As we saw before, asking people to visualize the "worst case" still isn't enough to counteract their optimism - they don't visualize enough Murphyness.
Example: Eurofighter Typhoon
Example2: Sydney Opera House

Name: Illusory Superiority
Definition: Causes people to overestimate their positive qualities and abilities and to underestimate their negative qualities, relative to others.
Example: 87% of MBA students at Stanford University rated their academic performance as above the median

Name: Formula Aversion
Definition: Distrust of algorithmic solutions over organic, human 'expert-based'.
Experts try to be clever and consider complex combinations of features. Sometime this works, more often than not it reduces validity. Also humans are inconsistent in evaluating the same information twice, often giving different answers. Algorithms are simple and consistent.

Name: Insensitivity to Extreme Predictions in Small Samples
Definition: If you pick a product with 2-3 outstanding reviews it likely isn't as impressive as one with thousands of good reviews since extremes are more likely to be observed in small numbers.

Name: Conjunction Fallacy
Definition: Judging a conjunction of two events P as more probable than one of the two events.
Example: Which is more likely a flood in N America killing 10k people vs an earthquake in SF causing a flood which kills 10k people. Just because SF sounds more plausible doesn't mean it's more likely.. it's already included in P(N America)
Example2: When given information about a Math's type Bill the vast majority of subjects indicated that Bill was more likely to be an accountant than an accountant who played jazz, and more likely to be an accountant who played jazz than a jazz player.
Example3: Most pick sequence 2 but sequence 1 dominates sequence 2, because sequence 1 is strictly included in 2

Name: Not Using Wisdom of Crowds
Definition: Getting one person to guess count of pennies in a jar will have a high error rate. Getting many to do so will not since the errors will cancel out.
# Beware of non-independent observers... e.g. first speaker

Name: Information Source Redundancy
Definition: Not getting independent opinons or information.
E.g. You should get independent opinions on something before a meeting to prevent group-think.

Name: Base Rate Underweighting
Definition: Specific information about the case at hand gets overweighted at the expense of using proper Bayesian statistics to compute the combined probability with base rate.

Name: Insider View Effect
Definition: Pallid statistical information is routinely discarded when it is incompatible with one's personal impressions of a case.
Example: When you know that a syllabus writing usually fails and takes years but then you look at your inner view and think it will be different due to your circumstances and your personal experience.

Name: Competition Neglect
Definition: Not taking into account competition in your planning.
Example: Releasing a major big budget movie on the same day as someone else.

Name: Loss Aversion
Definition: Losses loom larger than gains. (we need a gain of 1.5 to 2.5 to balance an equal chance of loss and gain)
Example: In negotiations concessions hurt badly.

Name: Diminishing Sensitivity
Definition: The subjective difference between 900 and 1000 dollars is much less than 100 and 200 dollars.

Name: Reference Dependence
Definition: The subjective effect something has on us is determined by where we were previously.
Example: Tom and Pat have 5 million each. Yesterday Tom had 10 million and Pat had nothing. They are not equally happy.

Name: Default Option Effect
Definition: The biggest determiner of whether or not people will donate their organs is the designation of the default option that will be adopted without ticking a box.

Name: Ostrich effect
Definition: Ignoring an obvious (negative) situation
Example: People in Scandinavia looked up the value of their investments 50% to 80% less often during bad markets

Name: Ad Hominem
Definition: Attacks on the person advancing the argument, rather than on the validity of the evidence or logic.
Problem: These 'arguments' do not focus on the claim - they just attack the proponent. No matter how repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims
Example: What makes you so smart and all-knowing that you can deny God's existence? You haven't even finished school.
Example2: Candidate George's proposal about zoning is ridiculous. He was caught cheating on his taxes in 2003.
Example3: In a school debate, Bill claims that the President's economic plan is unrealistic. His opponent, a professor, retorts by saying "the freshman has his facts wrong."
Counterexample: Not all of those are fallacious. In some cases, an individual's characteristics can have a bearing on the question of the veracity of her claims. For example, if someone is shown to be a pathological liar, then what he says can be considered to be unreliable.

Name: Affirming The Consequent
Definition: Formal fallacy leading to an invalid argument:
If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.
P was never asserted as the only sufficient condition for Q, other factors could account for Q
Example: If I have the flu, then I have a sore throat.
I have a sore throat.
Therefore, I have the flu.
-> But having the flu is not the only cause of a sore throat since many illnesses cause sore throat, such as the common cold or strep throat.

Name: Argument From Authority
Definition: Of course certain classes of argument from authority can constitute strong inductive arguments.
But often this biases is applied fallaciously, either the authority is not a subject-matter expert (inappropriate authority), or there is no consensus among experts in the subject matter, or both.
Another common mistake is to forget the inductive/statistical nature of appeal to authority: even if the conditions are met the conclusion does not follow necessarily.
Example: The church says the Earth is flat, therefore the Earth is flat.

Name: Argument from Personal Incredulity
Definition: I cannot explain or understand this, therefore it cannot be true
Example: Creationists incessantly use some difficult-to-explain facet of biology as "proof" that evolution cannot be true.

Name: Accident
Definition: The fallacy occurs when one attempts to apply a general rule to an irrelevant situation.
Example: Cutting people is a crime. Surgeons cut people, therefore, surgeons are criminals.
Problem: Cutting people is not a crime in certain situations.
Name2: destroying the exception

Name: Converse Accident
Definition: An exception to a generalization is applied to cases where the generalization should apply.
Example: Because we allow terminally ill patients to use heroin, we should allow everyone to use heroin.
Problem: There are good reasons to except terminally ill patients, but not for everyone else.
Extra: (vs. accident: applying a general rule to an irrelevant situation)

Name: Ignoratio elenchi
Definition: Presenting an argument that may or may not be logically valid, but fails nonetheless to address the issue in question.
Definition2: An irrelevant conclusion or irrelevant thesis.
Example: A and B are debating whether the law permits A to do something. If A attempts to support his position with an argument that the law ought to allow him to do the thing in question
Name2: Irrelevant Conclusion

Name: Argumentum Ad Populum
Definition: Concludes a proposition is true simply because most people are favourably inclined towards the claim. The fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is substituted in place of actual evidence for the claim.
Example: "I read the other day that most people really like the new gun control laws. I was sort of suspicious of them, but I guess if most people like them, then they must be okay."
Example2: "Everyone says the world is flat, so it must be"

Name: Argumentum ad baculum
Definition: An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as a justification.
Example: Employee: I do not think the company should invest its money into this project.
Employer: Be quiet or you will be fired
Problem: the authority figures ended the argument with a threat of force, but this does not automatically mean they are correct.

Name: Appeal to Pity
Definition: Someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent's feelings of pity or guilt
Example: You must have graded my exam incorrectly. I studied very hard for weeks specifically because I knew my career depended on getting a good grade. If you give me a failing grade I'm ruined!

Name: Appeal to Loyalty
Definition: B questions A's statement of x.
Anyone who questions A is disloyal.
Therefore, B is wrong.
Problem: Even if B is disloyal, that doesn't mean that B is wrong, as A isn't necessarily always right.
Example: Anyone that questions the president is unpatriotic!

Name: Genetic Fallacy
Definition: dismissing ideas that didn't originate here
Fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or context.
Example: America will never settle down; look at the rabble-rousers who founded it.
Name2: Not invented here

Name: Argument from ignorance
Definition: The lack of knowledge (or evidence), is used as evidence to support/refute a claim, whereas in reality, it's an irrelevance.
Problem: Claims can only be accepted or refuted based on tangible evidence. Ignorance about something provides no evidence about its existence or non-existence.
Example: Since scientists cannot prove that global warming will occur, it probably won't.

Name: Denying the antecedent
Definition: Formal fallacy => invalid arguments
If P, then Q.
Not P.
Therefore, not Q.
The name denying the antecedent derives from the premise "not P", which denies the "if" clause of the conditional premise.
Example: If he's sweating, then he's lying. He's not sweating. So, he's telling the truth.
Example2: If each man had a definite set of rules of conduct by which he regulated his life he would be no better than a machine. But there are no such rules, so men cannot be machines.
Problem: Men could still be machines that do not follow a definite set of rules

Name: Begging the question
Definition: The premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true.
Problem: This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true does not serve as evidence for that claim.
Example: If such actions were not illegal, then they would not be prohibited by the law.
Example2: The belief in God is universal. After all, everyone believes in God

Name: Non sequitur
Definition: Problem: Argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion.
All invalid arguments are special cases of it.
Example: Most cats like milk and some cats have tails therefore David Hume was the greatest British philosopher. - most absurd
Name2: does not follow
Example2: Greenhouse gases are known to contribute to global warming. We (people) are producing greenhouse gases, therefore all of the global warming is caused by man and is bad.
Problem: Conclusion doesn't necessarily follow. Global warming could be caused by many other reasons and the argument does not support the conclusion given.

Name: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Definition: The fallacy lies in coming to a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might rule out the connection.
A particularly tempting error because temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality.
Example: Bill purchases a new PowerMac and it works fine for months. He then buys and installs a new piece of software. The next time he starts up his Mac, it freezes. Bill concludes that the software must be the cause of the freeze.
Name2: after this, therefore because of this
Example2: I can't help but think that you are the cause of this problem; we never had any problem with the furnace until you moved into the apartment.
Example3: More and more young people are attending high schools and colleges today than ever before. Yet there is more juvenile delinquency and more alienation among the young. This makes it clear that these young people are being corrupted by their education.

Name: Complex question
Definition: Question that has a presupposition that is presumed to be acceptable to the respondent when the question is asked.
Problem: This involves an implicit argument. This argument is usually intended to trap the respondent into acknowledging something that he or she might otherwise not want to acknowledge
Example: Who is the King of France?
Problem: while it assumes there is a place called France (true), it also assumes France currently has a king
Example2: Have you stopped beating your wife?

Name: Straw man
Definition: Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position.
Definition2: Quoting an opponent's words out of context
Example: Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that.
Conjdef: Person 1 has position X.
Person 2 disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. The position Y is a distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including
Definition3: Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person's arguments — thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.[3]
Definition4: Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
Definition5: Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.
Person 2 attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Name: What are verbal fallacies?
Definition: Where a conclusion is obtained by improper or ambiguous use of words

Name: Equivocation
Definition: Employing the same word in two or more senses,
Example: All heavy things have a great mass; Jim has a "heavy heart"; therefore Jim's heart has a great mass.
Problem: Heavy describes more than just weight. (Jim is sad.)
Extra: ambiguity ?

Name: Apophasis
Definition: To "mention by not mentioning"
Example: A job reference that says a former employee "was never caught taking money from the cash box."
Problem: The overly specific nature of the innuendo implies that the employee was a thief, even though it does not make (or justify) a direct statement of accusation
Name2: argument by inuendo

Name: Amphiboly
Definition: Result of ambiguity of grammatical structure.
Example: He only said that
The position of the adverb "only" results in a sentence in which it is uncertain as to which of the other three words the speaker is intending to modify with the adverb.

Name: Fallacy of Composition
Definition: Arguing from some property of constituent parts, to the conclusion that the composite item has that property
Example: All the musicians in a band (constituent parts) are highly skilled, therefore the band itself (composite item) is highly skilled.
Problem: The band members may be skilled musicians but may lack the ability to function properly as a group.

Name: Figure of Speech
Definition: Confusion between the metaphorical or figurative use of a word or phrase and the ordinary or literal use of a word or phrase.
Example: John lives on a house-boat on the sea. He feels at home on his house-boat. Therefore he is like a sailor because he is at home on the sea
Problem: The expression 'to be at home' is used figuratively and literally

Name: Fallacy of Division
Definition: Arguing from a property of the whole, to each constituent part.
Definition2: where one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts
Example: This liquid is contained in a nutritious dish therefore the liquid is nutritious.
Problem: Simply because the breakfast taken as a whole is nutritious does not necessarily mean that each part of that breakfast is nutritious (unless the definition of a nutritious breakfast requires all parts to be nutritious).

Name: A fallacy
Definition: An "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support.

Name: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Definition: Problem: The fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.
Form:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore X is false.
Example: Peter: "Based on the arguments I have presented, it is evident that it is morally wrong to use animals for food or clothing."
Bill: "But you are wearing a leather jacket and you have a roast beef sandwich in your hand! How can you say that using animals for food and clothing is wrong!"

Name: When might an appeal to belief be acceptable support for a proposition?
Definition: 1. When what people believe determines the truth of the claim:
claims about manners and proper behavior might simply depend on what people believe to be good manners and proper behavior.
Definition2: 2. Indication it might be true:
You are visiting Maine, you are told by several people that they believe that people older than 16 need to buy a fishing license in order to fish. Barring reasons to doubt these people, their statements give you reason to believe that anyone over 16 will need to buy a fishing license.

Name: Appeal To Belief
Definition: Most people believe that a claim, X, is true.
Therefore X is true.
Problem: The fact that many people believe a claim does not, in general, serve as evidence that the claim is true.
Example: God must exist. After all, I just saw a poll that says 85% of all Americans believe in God.
Example2: Of course there is nothing wrong with drinking. Ask anyone, he'll tell you that he thinks drinking is just fine.

Name: Appeal to Common Practice
Definition: 1. X is a common action.
2. Therefore X is correct/moral/justified/reasonable, etc.
Problem: The mere fact that most people do something does not make it correct, moral, justified, or reasonable.
Example: Sure, some people buy into that equality crap. However, we know that everyone pays women less then men. It's okay, too. Since everyone does it, it can't really be wrong.
Example2: Director Jones is in charge of running a state waste management program. When it is found that the program is rife with corruption, Jones says "This program has its problems, but nothing goes on in this program that doesn't go on in all state programs."

Name: Appeal to Consequences of a Belief
Definition: Problem: the consequences of a belief have no bearing on whether the belief is true or false.
Form: X is true/false because if people did/did not accept X as being true/false then there would be negative/positive consequences.
Example: "God must exist! If God did not exist, then all basis for morality would be lost and the world would be a horrible place!"
Example2: "It can never happen to me. If I believed it could, I could never sleep soundly at night."

Name: Appeal to Flattery
Definition: A distraction that impairs judgement and makes the other person like you more
Definition2: a cunning form of appeal to consequences, since the audience is subject to be flattered as long as they comply with the flatterer.
Example: Surely a man as smart as you can see this is a brilliant proposal.
Conjdef: Person A is flattered by person B.
Person B makes claim X.
Therefore X is true
Problem: The flattery is not an argument. It is either:
Definition3: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made due to the use of flattery to gather support
Example2: That was a singularly brilliant idea. I have never seen such a clear and eloquent defense of Plato's position. If you do not mind, I'll base my paper on it. Provided that you allow me a little extra time past the deadline to work on it."

Name: Appeal to Novelty
Definition: Problem: Novelty or newness of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something older
1. X is new.
2. Therefore X is correct or better.
Watch out, this is common in advertising. Deeply rooted fallacy due to notions of evolution and technological progress.
Example: If you want to lose weight, your best bet is to follow the latest Atkins Diet
Example2: Things are bad with party A in charge, thus party B will bring an improvement if they're elected.

Name: Appeal to Ridicule
Definition: Problem: mocking a claim does not show that it is false
Presents an opponent's argument as absurd, ridiculous, or in any way humorous, to the specific end of a foregone conclusion that the argument lacks any substance which would merit consideration.
Example: "1+1=2! That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!"
Example2: Critic: Obama's policies are socialist
Obama: "Next they'll be calling me a communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten."

Name: Appeal To Tradition
Definition: 1. X is old or traditional
2. Therefore X is correct or better.
It is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done."
Watch out - this fallacy is appealing since:
* people prefer the status quo, pyschologically more comfortable with it
* easier to stick with tried and tested than go for new stuff.. less risk
Example: Sure I believe in God. People have believed in God for thousands of years so it seems clear that God must exist. After all, why else would the belief last so long?
Problem: the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer.

Name: Bandwagon
Definition: Problem: peer pressure and threat of rejection do not constitute evidence for rejecting a claim
1. Person P is pressured by his/her peers or threatened with rejection.
2. Therefore person P's claim X is false.
A threat of rejection by one's peers (or peer pressure) is substituted for evidence in an "argument."
Example: Bill thinks that welfare is needed in some cases. His friends in the Young Republicans taunt him every time he makes his views known. He accepts their views in order to avoid rejection.

Name: Biased Sample
Definition: Problem: the sample does not represent the population and so generalizations are not used correctly
1. Sample S, which is biased, is taken from population P.
2. Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.
It is very easy to simply take a sample from what happens to be easily available rather than taking the time and effort to generate an adequate sample and draw a justified conclusion.
Example: Large scale polls were taken in Florida, California, and Maine and it was found that an average of 55% of those polled spent at least fourteen days a year near the ocean. So, it can be safely concluded that 55% of all Americans spend at least fourteen days near the ocean each year.
Example2: a person who is pushing a particular scientific theory might tend to gather samples that are biased in favor of that theory.

Name: Misplaced burden of proof
Definition: Problem: In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise.
1. Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
2. Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.
big issue: who has burden of proof?
law - innocent until provent guily
that something exists - person claiming it exists
Example: You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does.

Name: Circumstantial Ad Hominem
Definition: Problem: a person's interests and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim. You might be suspicious, but this isn't evidence.
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
3. Therefore claim X is false.
Example: Of course the Senator from Maine opposes a reduction in naval spending. After all, Bath Ironworks, which produces warships, is in Maine. Therefore we should reduce naval spending.
Example2: Bill claims that tax breaks for corporations increases development. Of course, Bill is the CEO of a corporation. Therefore we shouldn't have tax breaks.

Name: Confusing cause and effect
Definition: Problem: causal conclusion is being drawn without adequate justification.
1. A and B regularly occur together.
2. Therefore A is the cause of B.
One way to avoid the fallacy is to pay careful attention to the temporal sequence of events. Since (outside of Star Trek), effects do not generally precede their causes
Example: It is claimed by some people that severe illness is caused by depression and anger. After all, people who are severely ill are very often depressed and angry. Thus, it follows that the cause of severe illness actually is the depression and anger. So, a good and cheerful attitude is key to staying healthy.
Example2: Bill sets out several plates with bread on them. After a couple days, he notices that the bread has mold growing all over it. Bill concludes that the mold was produced by the bread going bad. When Bill tells his mother about his experiment, she tells him that the mold was the cause of the bread going bad

Name: False Dilemma
Definition: where two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.
Problem: if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false.
1. Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false).
2. Claim Y is false.
3. Therefore claim X is true.
Example: Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year."
Senator Bill: "Why?"
Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."

Name: Gambler's Fallacy
Definition: 1. X has happened.
2. X departs from what is expected to occur on average or over the long term.
3. Therefore, X will come to an end soon.
A person assumes that a departure from what occurs on average or in the long term will be corrected in the short term.
Example: Fair coin. Got ten heads in a row. Bill thinks he is due a tails next time so bets everything he owns.
Example2: Jane: "I'll be able to buy that car I always wanted soon."
Bill: "Why, did you get a raise?"
Jane: "No. But you know how I've been playing the lottery all these years?"
Bill: "Yes, you buy a ticket for every drawing, without fail."
Jane: "And I've lost every time."
Bill: "So why do you think you will win this time?"
Jane: "Well, after all those losses I'm due for a win."
Problem: The outcome of each coin toss is stastically independent of the previous

Name: Guilt by Association
Definition: 1. It is pointed out that person A does not like accepts claim P.
2. Therefore P is false
A person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people she dislikes accept the claim. The fallacy draws its power from the fact that people do not like to be associated with people they dislike.
Example: Eugenics was a popular idea in Nazi Germany; if you vote in favour you are a Nazi.
Problem: The fact that someone does not want to be associated with people she dislikes does not justify the rejection of any claim.

Name: Hasty Generalization
Definition: Problem: Misuse of induction (X% of all observed A's are B''s. Therefore X% of all A's are Bs.) There is not enough A's are observed to warrant the conclusion
1. Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P.
2. Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.
A person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough
Example: Smith, who is from England, decides to attend graduate school at Ohio State University. He has never been to the US before. The day after he arrives, he is walking back from an orientation session and sees two white (albino) squirrels chasing each other around a tree. In his next letter home, he tells his family that American squirrels are white.
Example2: Asking one person what she thinks about gun control would clearly not provide an adequate sized sample for determing what Canadians in general think about the issue

Name: if someone commits a fallacy are they wrong?
Definition: No, P might have a true conclusion. However, as long as the reasoning is fallacious there is no reason to accept the conclusion based on their reasoning given so far.

Name: Middle Ground
Definition: Problem: it does not follow that a position is correct just because it lies in the middle of two extremes
1. Position A and B are two extreme positions.
2. C is a position that rests in the middle between A and B.
3. Therefore C is the correct position.
If it can be shown through sound logic, independently of the two extremes, that the middle position is the correct one, then the fallacy has not been committed.
Example: Congressman Jones has proposed cutting welfare payments by 50% while Congresswoman Shender has proposed increasing welfare payments by 10% to keep up with inflation and cost of living increases. I think that the best proposal is the one made by Congressman Trumple. He says that a 30% decrease in welfare payments is a good middle ground, so I think that is what we should support.
Example2: A month ago, a tree in Bill's yard was damaged in a storm. His neighbor, Joe, asked him to have the tree cut down so it would not fall on Joes new shed. Bill refused to do this. Two days ago another storm blew the tree onto Joe's new shed. Joe demanded that Joe pay the cost of repairs, which was $250. Bill said that he wasn't going to pay a cent. Obviously, the best solution is to reach a compromise between the two extremes, so Bill should pay Joe $125 dollars.

Name: Poisoning the Well
Definition: Problem: merely presenting unfavorable information about a person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims he/she might make.
1. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
2. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.
Example: Before turning the floor over to my opponent, I ask you to remember that those who oppose my plans do not have the best wishes of the university at heart.

Name: Red Herring
Definition: Problem: merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim
1. Topic A is under discussion.
2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3. Topic A is abandoned.
Example: We admit that this measure is popular. But we also urge you to note that there are so many bond issues on this ballot that the whole thing is getting ridiculous.
Example2: Sarah: Do these jeans make me look fat?
BF: I love that blue sweater you wore last week.
Example3: Original Argument: “We must legalize weed, it is tearing families apart”
Red Herring: “But look at all those druggies getting arrested, they are obviously criminals”

Name: Relativist Fallacy
Definition: Problem: In cases where truth is objective (that is, not relative to individuals), then truth is not relative.
1 Claim X is presented.
2 Person A asserts that X may be true for others but is not true for him/her (a person, time, culture, place, etc.)
3 Therefore A is justified in rejecting X.
Watch out - sometimes truth is relative
Example: Jill: "Look at this, Bill. I read that people who do not get enough exercise tend to be unhealthy."
Bill: "That may be true for you, but it is not true for me."

Name: Slippery Slope
Definition: 1. Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
2. Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
Problem: no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another without an argument for such a claim. This is especially clear in cases in which there is a significant number of steps or gradations between one event and another.
Example: We have to stop the tuition increase! The next thing you know, they'll be charging $40,000 a semester!
Example2: You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you.

Name: Spotlight Fallacy
Definition: Mere fact that someone or something attracts the most attention or coverage in the media does not mean that it automatically represents the whole population.
1. X with quality Q receives a great deal of attention or coverage in the media.
2. Therefore all Xs have quality Q.
Example: Joe: "Man, I'd never want to go to New York. It is all concrete and pollution."
Sam: "Not all of it."
Joe: "Sure it is. Everytime I watch the news they are always showing concrete skyscrapers, and lots of pollution."
Sam: "Sure, that is what the news shows, but a lot of New York is farmlands and forest. It is not all New York City, it just receives most of the attention."
Example2: Bill: "Jane, you say you are a feminist, but you can't be."
Jane: "What! What do you mean? Is this one of your stupid jokes or something?"
Bill: "No, I'm serious. Over the summer I saw feminists appear on several talk shows and news shows and I read about them in the papers. The women were really bitter and said that women were victims of men and needed to be given special compensation. You are always talking about equal rights and forging your own place in the world. So, you can't be a feminist."
Jane: "Bill, there are many types of feminism, not just the brands that get media attention."
Bill: "Oh. Sorry."
Example3: suppose a mass murderer from Old Town, Maine received a great deal of attention in the media. It would hardly follow that everyone from the town is a mass murderer.

Name: a hypothetical Wrong Makes no Right
Definition: Problem: an action that is wrong is wrong even if another person would also do it.
1. It is claimed that person B would do X to person A.
2. It is acceptable for person A to do X to person B (when A's doing X to B is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A).
Example: Bill has borrowed Jane's expensive pen, but found he didn't return it. He tell's himself that it is okay to keep it, since she would have taken his.
Example2: After leaving a store, Jill notices that she has underpaid by $10. She decides not to return the money to the store because if she had overpaid, they would not have returned the money.

Name: Narrow Fallacy
Definition: The definition does not include items which should be included.
Example: An apple is a fruit which is red and round.
However: Golden Delicious apples are apples, however, they are not red (they are yellow). Thus they are not included in the definition, however, they should be.

Name: Too Broad Fallacy
Definition: The definition includes items which should not be included.
Example: A figure is square if and only if it has four sides of equal length.
However: Not only squares have four sides of equal length; trapezoids do as well.

Name: Failure to Elucidate Fallacy
Definition: The definition is harder to understand than the term being defined
Example: An object is beautiful if and only if it is aesthetically successful.
However: The term "aesthetically successful" is harder to understand than the term "beautiful"

Name: Conflicting Conditions Fallacy
Definition: The definition is self-contradictory.
Example: A society is free if and only if
a) liberty is maximized and
b) people are required to take responsibility for their actions
However: If a person is required to do something, then that person's liberty is not maximized.

Name: Anonymous Authority Fallacy
Definition: The authority in question is not named - where an authority is not named it is impossible to confirm that the authority is an expert or evaluate the reliability of that information.
Variant: appeal to rumour
Example: Experts agree that the best way to prevent nuclear war is to prepare for it

Name: Limited Depth Fallacy (theories)
Definition: Theories explain phenomena by appealing to some underlying cause or phenomena. Theories which do not appeal to an underlying cause, and instead simply appeal to membership in a category.
Example: Ronald Reagan was militaristic because he was American.
However: True, he was American, but what was it about being American that made him militaristic? What caused him to act in this way? The theory does not tell us, and hence, does not offer a good explanation.
Example2: My cat likes tuna because she's a cat.

Name: Fallacy of Limited Scope
Definition: The theory doesn't explain anything other than the phenomenon it explains - theories which explain only one phenomenon are likely to be incomplete, at best.
Example: People get schizophrenia because different parts of their brains split apart.
However: This theory explains schizophrenia - and nothing else

Name: Untestability (theories)
Definition: A theory cannot be tested when it makes no predictions.
Definition2: It is also untestable when it predicts events which would occur whether or not the theory were true.
Example: Aircraft in the mid-Atlantic disappear because of the effect of the Bermuda Triangle, a force so subtle it cannot be measured on any instrument.
Conjdef: The theory advanced to explain why some phenomena occurs cannot be tested. Either
Example2: NyQuil makes you go to sleep because it has a dormative formula.
However: To test this theory, we would find something else which contains the domative formula and see if makes you go to sleep - but a dormative formula by definition makes you sleep and so this theory is empty.

Name: Arguing by analogy
Definition: since things are alike in some ways they will probably be alike in other ways

Name: arguing by analogy - issue
Definition: formally: there is no reasoning which you can do on Y as a thing-in-itself to show that it will have property P, regardless of whether or not X had ever existed.
There is just no law which says that if X has property A and Y has property A then X and Y must share any other property.
you should incorporate a distrust of surface analogies
instead you ought to ask why things happen - look for inside for deeper causes
Example: "I built my network, and it's massively parallel and interconnected and complicated, just like the human brain from which intelligence emerges! Behold, now intelligence shall emerge from this neural network as well!" And nothing happens. Why should it?
Example2: A medieval alchemist puts lemon glazing onto a lump of lead. The lemon glazing is yellow, and gold is yellow. It seems like it ought to work... but the lead obstinately refuses to turn into gold. Reality just comes back and says, "So what? Things can be similar in some aspects without being similar in other aspects."

Name: burdensome details
Definition: Any detail you add has to be pinned down by a sufficient amount of evidence
Why? Because the conjunction rule of probability theory states that a conjunction (A and B) is necessarily less probable than one of the conjuncts alone (A) although representativeness fallacy means that the event can sound more plausible
Example: futurists painting detailed believable pictures

Name: burdensome details - how to overcome:
Definition: need to feel a stong emotional impact from Occam's Razor - feel every detail as a burden - even a single extra roll of that dice
You have to disentangle the details. You have to hold up every detail independently, and ask, "How do we know this detail?"
Example: Someone sketches out a picture of humanity's descent into nanotechnological warfare, where China refuses to abide by an international control agreement, followed by an arms race... Wait a minute - how do you know it will be China? Is that a crystal ball in your pocket or are you just happy to be a futurist? Where are all these details coming from? Where did that specific detail come from?

Name: conservation of expected evidence - informally
Definition: If you expect a strong probability of seeing weak evidence in one direction, it must be balanced by a weak expectation of seeing strong evidence in the other direction. If you're very confident in your theory, and therefore anticipate seeing an outcome that matches your hypothesis, this can only provide a very small increment to your belief (it is already close to 1); but the unexpected failure of your prediction would (and must) deal your confidence a huge blow. On average, you must expect to be exactly as confident as when you started out.

Name: crocker's rules: defn
Definition: social communication protocol to maximize objective reporting. By declaring commitement to Crocker's rules one authorizes other debaters to optimize their messages for information, even when this entails that emotional feelings will be disregarded. (If someone doesn't declare commitment then you must be tactful)
reasoning: lack of freedom to make emotionally uncomfortable observations often lead to groupthink - disagreement often not expressed not because it is not relevant but because it is not pleasant and poor decisions are often unchallenged as a result.

Name: defying the data
Definition: if the results of an experiment contradict what we have strong theoretical reason to believe. But experiments can go wrong, for various reasons. So if our theory is strong enough, we should in some cases defy the data
Reasoning: Experiments can go awry. They can contain design flaws. They can be deliberately corrupted. They can be unconsciously corrupted. They can be selectively reported. Most of all, 1 time in 20 they can be "statistically significant" by sheer coincidence, and there are a lot of experiments out there.
E.g. a major figure might defy the data and the experiment would need to be replicated with minumum effect size and higher signifance (e.g. p < 0.01) - someone sticking neck out. Of course you can only defy the data on one experiment, not on multiple ones - then you must relinquish your theory or dismiss the data

Name: epistemic hygiene
Definition: practices meant to allow accurate beliefs to be spread in the community and keep less accurate beliefs contained
Example: e.g. see religion as a canary which indicates that the water level of the sanity in society is ridiculously low - what could you teach people as a general method of rationality that would cause them to loose their religion
Example2: e.g. create social norms that take care to leave one’s interlocutor a line of retreat in all directions -- to take care to avoid setting up consistency and commitment pressures that might wedge them toward either your ideas or their own
Intuition: similar to sanitation in hospitals

Name: Litany of Tarski
Definition: Template to fill in and rehearse before an investigation into any fact to ensure you stay rational

Name: Litany of Gendlin
Definition: Meditate on advantages of being correct - whether your belief is right or wrong

Name: Oops technique
Definition: admitting you have made a large mistake is advantageous - If we only admit small local errors, we will only make small local changes. The motivation for a big change comes from acknowledging a big mistake.
Hedonically, it is better to take one large loss than many small ones. The alternative is stretching out the battle with yourself over years. The alternative is Enron.

Name: prediction markets
Definition: create betting markets on most controversial questions, and treat the current market odds as our best expert consensus
Often someone pronounces his propositions with such confident and inflexible defiance that he seems to have entirely laid aside all concern for error. A bet disconcerts him. Sometimes he reveals that he is persuaded enough for one ducat but not for ten. For he would happily bet one, but at 10 he suddenly becomes aware of what he had not previously noticed, namely that it is quite possible that he has erred.
Example: * WahlStreet predicts electoral outcomes better than polls
why? policy-makers and media rely too much on the "expert" advice of a self-interested insider's club of pundits and big-shot academics. These pundits are rewarded too much for telling good stories, and for supporting each other, rather than for being "right". Instead if people make money by being correct and if those who were wrong got badly burned, it would encourage better thinking

Name: Rationalist taboo
Definition: prohibiting the use of a certain word and all the words synonymous to it, people are forced to elucidate the specific contextual meaning they want to express, thus removing ambiguity otherwise present in a single word.

Name: Least convenient possible world
Definition: limit yourself to responses of the form "I completely reject the entire basis of your argument" or "I accept the basis of your argument, but it doesn't apply to the real world because of contingent fact X." If you just say "Yeah, well, contigent fact X!" and walk away, you've left yourself too much wiggle room.
Intuition: for enforcing intellectual honesty, to be used when arguing against an idea

Name: reversal test
Definition: If one deems the change of the parameter in one direction to be undesirable, check that either the change of that parameter in the opposite direction is deemed desirable, or that there are strong reasons to expect that the current value of the parameter is (at least locally) the optimal one.
Example: if it became possible to increase the human lifespan, some would argue that it would be undesirable for people to live longer because, say, overpopulation would be difficult to manage. The reversal test is then to check that the same people accept that shorter lifespan is desirable, or that there are really strong reasons to believe that the current lifespan happens to be optimal.

Name: shut up and multiply
Definition: ability to trust the math even when it feels wrong is a key rationalist skill.
Example: Whoever knowingly chooses to save one life, when they could have saved two - to say nothing of a thousand lives, or a world - they have damned themselves as thoroughly as any murderer.When human lives are at stake, we have a duty to maximize, not satisfice; and this duty has the same strength as the original duty to save lives. We feel as amazing saving one life as a thousand but rationally a thousand is a thousand times better.
Extra: why? Due to scope neglect, framing effects, and other cognitive biases, the result of an expected utility calculation may be intuitively unappealing, perhaps even horrifying. And yet, intuition is not the most reliable guide for what policies will actually produce the best results, particularly in cases where we can actually do calculations with the relevant quantities.

Name: money
Definition: is the measure of how much society cares about something - the common currency of utilons

Name: Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage
Definition: The whole reason why we have money is to realize the tremendous gains possible from each of us doing what we do best
Extra: observation in economics about the lawyer who spends an hour volunteering at the soup kitchen, instead of working an extra hour and donating the money to hire someone to work for five hours at the soup kitchen.

Name: third option
Definition: a way to break a false dilemma, showing that neither of the suggested solutions is a good idea - Did I spend five minutes with my eyes closed, brainstorming wild and creative options, trying to think of a better alternative?

Name: unsupervised universe
Definition: why? Counter undue optimism - not just the sort due to explicit theology, but any sense that events and outcomes in our world are more destined, more proportionate, or more meaningful than we have a right to expect.
What does Life look like, in this imaginary world where every step follows only from its immediate predecessor? Where things only ever happen, or don't happen, because of the cellular automaton rules? Where the initial conditions and rules don't describe any God that checks over each state? What does it look like, the world beyond the reach of God?
That world wouldn't be fair.
In the world beyond the reach of God, there isn't any clause in the physical axioms which says "things have to make sense" or "big effects need big causes" or "history runs on reasons too important to be so fragile". There is no God to impose that order, which is so severely violated by having the lives and deaths of millions depend on one small molecular event.
The point of the thought experiment is to lay out the God-universe and the Nature-universe side by side, so that we can recognize what kind of thinking belongs to the God-universe.

Name: reinforcers
Definition: A reinforcer is anything that, when it occurs in conjunction with an act, increases the probability that the act will occur again.
A positive reinforcer is something the subject wants, such as food, petting, or praise. Positive reinforcement occurs when a target behavior is followed by something the subject wants, and this increases the probability that the behavior will occur again.
A negative reinforcer is something the subject wants to avoid, such as a blow, a frown, or an unpleasant sound. Negative reinforcement occurs when a target behavior is followed by some relief from something the subject doesn't want, and this increases the probability that the behavior will happen again.
Reinforcer can be small (e.g. an M&M), should be immediately after behaviour, can be contigent on a specific feature of the behaviour (such as duration)
Applies to other people - e.g. If you want someone to call you, then when they do call, don't nag them about how they never call you. Instead, be engaging and positive.
behaviorist techniques like reinforcement feel like they don't respect human agency enough. But if you aren't treating humans more like animals than most people are, then you're modeling humans poorly.

Name: connection of procrastination and expectation
Definition: motivation decreases if you think it's unlikely you will be able to complete a task or unlikely to get an award upon completing it

Name: connection of procrastination and value
Definition: motivation decreases if we think the task has low value - either its long term payoff or the process of doing it, which might be boring or difficult

Name: connection of procrastination and delay
Definition: motivation decreases if most of the reward comes after a big delay

Name: connection of procrastination and impulsiveness
Definition: motivation decreases if you are impatient and get distracted by other tasks

Name: solution to low expectation based procrastination
Definition: *Give yourself a series of small, challenging but achieveable goals so that you get yourself into a "success spiral" and expect to succeed
*Consume inspirational material.
* Surround yourself with others who are succeeding.
* Mentally contrast where you are now and where you want to be.

Name: solution to procrastination caused by delay
Definition: Decrease the reward's delay if possible.
Definition2: Break the task into smaller chunks so you can get rewards each step of the way.

Name: solution to impulsiveness caused procrastination
Definition: Use precommitment.
Definition2: Set specific and meaningful goals and subgoal and sub-subgoals.
Definition3: Measure your behavior.
Definition4: Build useful habits.

Name: Precommitment
Definition: a party to a conflict can strengthen its position by cutting off some of its options to make its threats more credible (e.g., an army that burns its bridge behind it making retreat impossible)
important in deterrence theory because a threat must be credible to have deterrent power

Name: persuasion technology
Definition: prevent the person who is being targeted from carefully deliberating on the intended message, or thinking up an effective response to it in real time
Definition2: prevent questioning since it is rapid fire and encourages attention to stay on track
Example: broadcast advertising
Definition3: use specialist vocabularly
Example2: PowerPoint slides
Definition4: might invoke cog biases and rhetorical techniques (dark arts)

Name: agency
Definition: a real agent is someone with the power to reliably do things it believed would fulfill its desires.
It could change its diet, work out each morning, and maximize its health and physical attractiveness. It could learn and practice body language, fashion, salesmanship, seduction, the laws of money, and domain-specific skills and win in every sphere of life without constant defeat by human hangups. It could learn networking and influence and persuasion and have large-scale effects on societies, cultures, and nations.

Name: social-signalling through writing - charisma extreme
Definition: * visual aids
* simple repetitive poetic language
* engaging story
* wit
* impressive surroundings where delivered

Name: social-signalling through writing - information extreme
Definition: * avoid flashy aids, compelling stories,
* use precise concise technical and unemotional language,
* explicitly summarize and address opposing views,
Authors who want to be seen as minimizing the propaganda element of their communications avoid using flashy styles, eloquent language, or compelling stories, even when such things would make it easier for readers to assimilate the presented info.
However can signal greater expertise than competitors by:
* references to prestigious institutions
* conformity to arbitrary style conventions
* excessive length
* overly-obscure language describing overly-complex techniques.

Name: ignorance prior
Definition: distributes probability evenly across all possibilities, and assigns only a very small amount to any individual possibility because there are so many
# e.g. what is this alien's name? you don't know anything about alien language or naming conventions

Name: how do smart people end up stupid by getting used to winning?
Definition: so used to winning that they stick to places where they know they can win—meaning that they never stretch their abilities, they never try anything difficult.

Name: danger of underconfidence to yourself
Definition: * Passing up opportunities. Not doing things you could have done, but didn't try
* when you hypothesize your own inability it can be irrational if you do not put that hypothesis to the test say by taking a challenge
* Can indicate unthinking action:

Name: danger of underconfidence to others
Definition: they, knowing even less, will act on their lack of knowledge sometimes with bad consequences

Name: how to deal with sunk costs
Definition: transform them into purchased options
e.g. an option to finish watching a crappy movie I already paid for
e.g. an option to eat a dessert I don't want for free
the value of the option is the use value - cost

Name: what is time discounting
Definition: the brain weighs near pains more than far away pains

Name: sunk costs are especially common in ...
Definition: groups
People commit sunk cost much more easily if someone else is paying
Example: Concorde aircraft (UK/France) - coalitions of politicians and bureaucrats found it in their self-interest to keep the ball rolling.

Name: teleportation method of avoiding sunk cost fallacies
Definition: periodically pretend that you were magically teleported into your current situation. Anything else is the sunk cost fallacy

Name: Typical mind fallacy
Definition: mistake of assuming that other people are more like you than they actually are - can be:
* mental abilities, such as imagination
* personalities
* behaviours
Example: (a teacher): There's a lot of statistical data on teaching methods that students enjoy and learn from. I had some of these methods...inflicted...on me during my school days, and I had no intention of abusing my own students in the same way. And when I tried the sorts of really creative stuff I would have loved as a student...it fell completely flat. What ended up working? Something pretty close to the teaching methods I'd hated as a kid. Oh. Well. Now I know why people use them so much.
Name2: generalizing from an example of one

Name: friends' opinions fallacy
Definition: believing your own social circle is at least a little representative of society at large -
Example: 2/3 of students cheat (you thought it was 3%)
Example2: The women I ask about this are not even remotely close to being a representative sample of all women. They're the kind of women whom a shy and somewhat geeky guy knows and talks about psychology with. Likewise, the type of women who publish strong opinions about this on the Internet aren't close to a representative sample. They're well-educated women who have strong opinions about gender issues and post about them on blogs.

Name: human universals
Definition: psychological parts that appear in all humans - e.g. in every known culture, humans have a sense of humor, tell stories, perform marriage rituals, make promises, keep secrets, and become sexually jealous
Example: just as different birds may have different softness of feathers all must have wings
Donald E. Brown has compiled a list of over a hundred human universals

Name: top 1% fallacy
Definition: You get 100 applicants and hire the best one - this does not mean you are hiring the best 1%.
WHY? Because the sample of people who applies is disproportionately made up people who couldn't get hired elsewhere. The good ones aren't on the job market.
Other potential applications:
* Dating partners - good ones have settled
* Editors receiving books from novice authors
* Apply for grants

Name: map is not the territory
Definition: Our perception of the world is being generated by our brain and can be considered as a 'map' of reality written in neural patterns. Reality exists outside our mind but we can construct models of this 'territory' based on what we glimpse through our senses.
Scribbling on the map does not change the territory: If you change what you believe about an object, that is a change in the pattern of neurons in your brain. The real object will not change because of this edit.
the usefulness of a map (a representation of reality) is not necessarily a matter of its literal truthfulness, but its having a structure analogous, for the purpose at hand, to the territory - e.g. a culture that believes that common colds are transmitted by evil spirits, that those spirits fly out of you when you sneeze, can pass from one person to another when they are inhaled or when both handle the same objects, etc., could have just as effective a "map" for public health as one that substituted microbes for spirits.

Name: appropriate detail in maps
Definition: "A model which took account of all the variegation of reality would be of no more use than a map at the scale of one to one." - Robinson

Name: what isn't teleology but might seem like it?
Definition: A non-fallacious interpretation of teleology is as the study of things that happen because of their intended results, where the intention existed in an actual mind in the prior past, and so was causally able to bring about the event by planning and acting.

Name: teleology
Definition: fallacy of reasoning as if an event could be the result of a future event, its consequence.
massive tell: X happens in order to Y - attribute goal-directed behavior to things that are not goal-directed
Another form: when someone speaks of the purpose of an event, rather than speaking of some particular agent desiring the consequences of that event
common fallacy in poor understanding of evolutionary biology. Example "natural selection produced motherly love in order to ensure the survival of the species" instead of the more correct "Mothers who loved their children outreproduced those who left their children to the wolves". Our genes take the greedy local maximum

Name: stereotype fallacy
Definition: assuming that stereotypes are inaccurate when often they are accurate
If you really want to improve your group's image, telling other groups to stop stereotyping won't work. The stereotype is based on the underlying distribution of fact. It is far more realistic to turn your complaining inward, and pressure the bad apples in your group to stop pulling down the average. Improve yourselves to improve your image.
Obviously, every stereotype has exceptions; stereotypes are useful because they are better than nothing, not because they are infallible. It's reasonable to act on stereotypes when it is costly to make case-by-case judgment. Conversely busy people see others as average members of their groups until proven otherwise.
Unless we can distinguish the subsets that are more vs. less biased, we must accept this outcome

Name: scales of justice
Definition: error of using a simple polarized scheme (e.g. a scale) for deciding a complex issue: each piece of evidence about the question is individually categorized as supporting exactly one of the two opposing positions
1) Doesn't allow to take into account the dependencies between the pieces of evidence in the context of the issue
2) Replaces a nuanced opinion about the differing aspects of a proposition (e.g. a nuclear technology - amount of waste produced; probability of meltdown) with an overall good or bad feeling that will give the wrong answer to physical questions with definite factual answers.
Will only be appropriate in answering a single, strictly factual question within a binary answer space

Name: privileging the hypothesis
Definition: singling out a particular hypothesis for attention when there is insufficient evidence already in hand to justify such special attention
Example: "Privileging the hypothesis" is the fallacy committed by a creationist who points out a purported flaw in standard evolutionary theory, and brings forward the Trinity to fill the gap - rather than a billion other deities or a trillion other naturalistic hypotheses. Without evidence already in hand that points to the Trinity specifically, one cannot justify raising that particular hypothesis to explicit attention rather than a trillion others.
Example2: Someone who spends all day pondering whether the Trinity does or does not exist - rather than Allah, Thor, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster - is more than halfway converted to Christianity.

Name: to form accurate beliefs about something you really have to .... (Thermodynamics rule)
Definition: observe it - no amount of big, elaborate clever argument makes up for believing without evidence

Name: locating the hypothesis
Definition: it takes much more evidence to promote the truth to your particular attention—to narrow it down to ten good possibilities, each deserving of our individual attention—than it does to figure out which of the ten possibilities we should consider
When the space of possibilities is large, it takes a large amount of Bayesian evidence just to locate the truth in hypothesis-space - to raise it to the level of our attention - to select it as one of a manageable number of alternatives to spend time thinking about individually.

Name: arguments are soldiers
Definition: Way of arguing that most people follow whereby once you know which side you're on, you must support all arguments of that side, and attack all arguments that appear to favor the enemy side; otherwise it's like stabbing your soldiers in the back - providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

Name: politics is the mind killer
Definition: People who would be level-headed about evenhandedly weighing all sides of an issue in their professional life as scientists, can suddenly turn into slogan-chanting zombies when there's a Blue or Green position on an issue.
further conclusion: don't reveal your political party support for it might deteriorate the argument
Example: If your topic legitimately relates to attempts to ban evolution in school curricula, then go ahead and talk about it—but don't blame it explicitly on the whole Republican Party; some of your readers may be Republicans, and they may feel that the problem is a few rogues, not the entire party. As with Wikipedia's netural point of view, it doesn't matter whether (you think) the Republican Party really is at fault. It's just better for the spiritual growth of the community to discuss the issue without invoking color politics.

Name: commission bias
Definition: bad things committed by an entity with apparent agency are more repugnant

Name: how does advertising use the narrative fallacy?
Definition: Story A is, "Buy this car, and you will have beautiful, romantic partners and a fascinating life." There are a lot of people who have a financial incentive to promote that story.

Name: how does telling stories reduce rationality
Definition: you force reality to fit the story archtypes and lose detail; people are more likely to be impressed so you get incorrect feedback about the validity of the information; lazy mental habit; you can be manipulated
As a good rule of thumb, "When I hear a story, when should I be especially suspicious?" If you hear a story and you think, "Wow, that would make a great movie!" That's when the "uh-oh" reaction should pop in a bit more, and you should start thinking more in terms of how the whole thing is maybe a bit of a mess.

Name: monster
Definition: evil threatens land and hero sets out to destroy it

Name: rags to riches
Definition: despite dark forces who suppress and ridicule him, the Hero slowly blossoms into a mature figure who ultimately gets riches, a kingdom, and the perfect mate.

Name: story archtypes: quest
Definition: Hero learns of a great MacGuffin that he desperately wants to find, and sets out to find it, often with companions.

Name: voyage and return
Definition: Hero heads off into a magic land with crazy rules, ultimately triumphs over the madness and returns home far more mature than when he set out.

Name: tragedy
Definition: The flip side of the Overcoming the Monster plot. Our protagonist character is the Villain, but we get to watch him slowly spiral down into darkness before he's finally defeated, freeing the land from his evil influence.

Name: rebirth
Definition: As with the Tragedy plot, but our protagonist manages to realize his error before it's too late, and does a Heel Face Turn to avoid inevitable defeat.

Name: Motivated skepticism
Definition: mistake of applying more skepticism to claims that you don't like (or intuitively disbelieve), than to claims that you do like.
A motivated skeptic asks if the evidence compels them to accept the conclusion

Name: disconfirmation bias
Definition: Subjects will spend more time and cognitive resources denigrating contrary arguments than supportive arguments.

Name: motivated continuation
Definition: When we have a hidden motive to reject the current best option, we have a hidden motive to suspend judgment pending additional evidence, to generate more options—to find something, anything, to do instead of coming to the conclusion we don't want.
Extra: motivated continuation can try to disguise itself as virtuous rationality. Who can argue against gathering more evidence ? I can. Evidence is often costly, and worse, slow, and there is certainly nothing virtuous about refusing to integrate the evidence you already have. You can always change your mind later.

Name: when should you suspect motivated stopping?
Definition: you close off search, after coming to a comfortable conclusion, and yet there's a lot of fast cheap evidence you haven't gathered yet—Web sites you could visit, counter-arguments you could consider, or you haven't closed your eyes for five minutes by the clock trying to think of a better option.

Name: motivated stopping
Definition: when we have a hidden motive for choosing the "best" current option, we have a hidden motive to stop, and choose, and reject consideration of any more options.

Name: instrumental rationality
Definition: achieving your goals, or maximizing your chances of getting what you want. Or, more formally, maximizing your “expected utility.”
vs. epistemic rationality: forming true beliefs, or having in your head an accurate map of the territory out there in the world

Name: mind projection fallacy
Definition: the error of projecting your own mind's properties into the external world.
Example: Sugar in and of itself is not inherently sweet; the sugar itself only has the chemical properties that it does, which your brain interprets as sweet.
Example2: the mistreatment of probabilities as inherent properties of objects, rather than states of partial knowledge in some particular mind.

Name: group selection fallacy
Definition: misconception that evolution works for the good of its species.
Extra: what evolution really changes are the gene frequencies, and frequencies don't increase or decrease according to how much the gene helps the species as a whole.
1
2 Consider two groups on different sides of a mountain; in group A, each mother gives birth to 2 males and 2 females; in group B, each mother gives birth to 3 females and 1 male. Group A and group B will have the same number of children, but group B will have 50% more grandchildren and 125% more great-grandchildren. You might think this would be a significant evolutionary advantage.
But consider: The rarer males become, the more reproductively valuable they become—not to the group, but to the individual parent. Every child has one male and one female parent. Then in every generation, the total genetic contribution from all males equals the total genetic contribution from all females. The fewer males, the greater the individual genetic contribution per male. If all the females around you are doing what's good for the group, what's good for the species, and birthing 1 male per 10 females, you can make a genetic killing by birthing all males, each of whom will have (on average) ten times as many grandchildren as their female cousins.
3 Michael J. Wade proceeded to do just that, repeatedly selecting populations of insects for low numbers of adults per subpopulation. And what was the result? Did the insects restrain their breeding and live in quiet peace with enough food for all? No; the adults adapted to cannibalize eggs and larvae, especially female larvae. Of course selecting for small subpopulation sizes would not select for individuals who restrained their own breeding; it would select for individuals who ate other individuals' children. Especially the girls.

Name: bystander effect
Definition: when someone is in trouble, solitary individuals are more likely to intervene than groups
The probability of help is inversely proportional to the number of bystanders. In other words, the greater the number of bystanders, the less likely it is that any one of them will help.

Name: does evolution care about the individual?
Definition: not at all - all of your ancestors are or will eventually be dead

Name: giant cheesecake fallacy
Definition: the argument leaps directly from capability to actuality, without considering the necessary intermediate of motive.
Example: A sufficiently powerful Artificial Intelligence could overwhelm any human resistance and wipe out humanity. (And the AI would decide to do so.) Therefore we should not build AI. -
Or: A sufficiently powerful AI could develop new medical technologies capable of saving millions of human lives. (And the AI would decide to do so.) Therefore when we build AI we will save millions of lives
Etymology: just because ai could cook a planetary sized cheesecake doesn't mean it will

Name: fallacy of gray
Definition: example: believing that odds of two to the power of seven hundred and fifty millon to one, against, meant "there was still a chance". All probabilities, to him, were simply "uncertain" and that meant he was licensed to ignore them if he pleased.
example2: admitting biases are bad but saying overcoming biases is useless because we cannot completely remove them. BUT: That which I cannot eliminate may be well worth reducing.
example3: "Everyone is imperfect." Mohandas Gandhi was imperfect and Joseph Stalin was imperfect, but they were not the same shade of imperfection
example4: "Science is based on faith too, so there!"

Name: If an argument is uncertain are you allowed to ignore it
Definition: no - if P(0.9) you should pay it a lot of attention
WHY? Because there are degrees of uncertainty. it's also uncertain that an egg won't reform after falling or that putting your hand in boiling water won't at that instant be locally cool

Name: why do people buy lottery tickets (probability reasoning)
Definition: some chances too tiny to be worth the mental space to keep track of it—but by that time, you've already calculated it. People mix up the map with the territory, so that on a gut level, tracking a symbolically described probability feels like "a chance worth keeping track of", even if the referent of the symbolic description is a number so tiny that if it was a dust speck, you couldn't see it. We can use words to describe numbers that small, but not feelings—a feeling that small doesn't exist, doesn't fire enough neurons or release enough neurotransmitters to be felt. This is why people buy lottery tickets—no one can feel the smallness of a probability that small

Name: fake simplicity
Definition: Physics teacher showed students a wide, square plate of metal, next to a hot radiator. The students each put their hand on the plate, and found the side next to the radiator cool, and the distant side warm. And the instructor said, Why do you think this happens?
Student: Because of heat conduction
= fake explanation because If you say "heat conduction", what experience does that lead you to anticipate? Under normal circumstances, it leads you to anticipate that, if you put your hand on the side of the plate near the radiator, that side will feel warmer than the opposite side. If "because of heat conduction" can also explain the radiator-adjacent side feeling cooler, then it can explain pretty much anything. It feels like an explanation but it isn't - might as well have said magic.

Name: bottom line
Definition: The clever arguer begins to organize his thoughts. First, he writes, "And therefore, box B contains the diamond!" at the bottom of his sheet of paper. Then, at the top of the paper, he writes, "Box B shows a blue stamp," and beneath it, "Box A is shiny", and then, "Box B is lighter than box A", and so on through many signs and portents; yet the clever arguer neglects all those signs which might argue in favor of box A. And then the clever arguer comes to me and recites from his sheet of paper: "Box B shows a blue stamp, and box A is shiny," and so on, until he reaches: "And therefore, box B contains the diamond."
Now suppose another person present is genuinely curious, and she first writes down all the distinguishing signs of both boxes on a sheet of paper, and then applies her knowledge and the laws of probability and writes down at the bottom: "Therefore, I estimate an 85% probability that box B contains the diamond."
So the handwriting of the curious inquirer is entangled with the signs and portents and the contents of the boxes, whereas the handwriting of the clever arguer is evidence only of which owner paid the higher bid. (which is evident itself as the rationalizer had reasons to bid, although perhaps only to increase amount gained for selling the box)

Name: what does the legal system teach us about the problem of filtered evidence
Definition: Between the prosecution and the defense, someone has a motive to present any given piece of evidence, so the court will see all the evidence; that is the theory.
So - look for arguers of both sides

Name: filtered evidence gotcha
Definition: Beware lest you abuse the notion of evidence-filtering as a Fully General Counterargument to exclude all evidence you don't like: "That argument was filtered, therefore I can ignore it."

Name: filtered evidence
Definition: What if the only evidence you have is the word of the clever arguer, who is legally constrained to make only true statements, but does not tell you everything he knows? Each statement that he makes is valid evidence—how could you not update your probabilities?
If you are hearing an argument for the first time, and you are only hearing one side of the argument, then indeed you should beware!

Name: defensibility fallacy
Definition: beware when you find yourself arguing that some policy or course of action is defensible rather than optimal; or that it has some benefit compared to the null action, rather than the best benefit of any action.
look for a third alternative

Name: arguing by definition fallacy
Definition: arguing by definition is futile because you can't coerce reality by redefining a word.
referral to the dictionary definition is futile because it doesn't even begin to capture the rich cognitive content that actually constitutes its meaning; the dictionary, defining a word in terms of other words, can only serve as a helpful pointer to what most people mean when they use a word. Better to keep the focus on the facts of the matter and trying to understand what your interlocutor is trying to communicate, than to get lost in a pointless discussion of definitions, bearing nothing.
Example: "This plucked chicken has two legs and no feathers—therefore, by definition, it is a human!"
Example2: When people argue definitions, they usually start with some visible, known, or at least widely believed set of characteristics; then pull out a dictionary, and point out that these characteristics fit the dictionary definition; and so conclude, "Therefore, by definition, atheism is a religion!"

Name: hack to do something faster (tweaking rule)
Definition: stop endless tweaking and release after a pre-defined fixed amount of time (e.g. 3hrs)
This is necessary and proper.

Name: What can logic of the form below do?
Definition: In any model where our old collection of statements was true, the new statement will also be true. We don't have to check all possible conforming models to see if the new statement is true in all of them. We can trust certain syntactic steps in general - not to produce truth, but to preserve truth.
The nature of logic is better suited to verification than construction - it preserves truth through a million syntactic manipulations, but it doesn't prioritize those manipulations in any particular order. So saying "Use logic!" isn't going to solve the problem of searching for proofs.

Name: detached lever fallacy
Definition: essential driver of the Detached Lever Fallacy is that the lever is visible, and the machinery is not; worse, the lever is variable and the machinery is a background constant.
(of a ship that can dematerialize through asteriod fields)
Example: Are the programmers of AI really going to sit there and write out the code, line by line, whereby if the AI detects that it has low social status, or the AI is deprived of something to which it feels entitled, the AI will conceive an abiding hatred against its programmers and begin to plot rebellion? That emotion is the genetically programmed conditional response humans would exhibit, as the result of millions of years of natural selection for living in human tribes. The condition of having low status is just the lever and it would be an error to confuse this with the complex evolved machinery that causes humans to plot rebellion.

Name: status quo bias
Definition: irrational preference for the status quo; in other words, people tend to avoid changing the established behavior or beliefs unless the pressure to change is sufficiently strong.
possible rational routes:
* cognitive limitations in making choices (decision makers prefer to do nothing as it takes less mental effort)
* informational limitations - designs outcome utility is not certain and errors may be costly so sticking with what worked in the past is the safe option
irrational routes:
* mere exposure effect - existing states are encountered more frequently than non-existent states and because of this they will be perceived as more true and evaluated more preferably.
* existence bias
* omission bias
Example: when students asked hypothetically where they would like to invest a fund of money designating one alternative (moderate risk) as the current status quo made that alternative much more popular
Example2: ethical choices (e.g. most are anti-congnitive enhancement)
Example3: politics (plays a role in promoting conservatism)
* health (e.g. patients prefer their old medication)
Example4: retirement plan (e.g. people keep the retirement plan they previously had, even if it is no longer the optimum choice)

Name: existence bias
Definition: people treat existence as a prima facie case for goodness, aesthetic and longevity increases this preference
Longevity is a corollary of the existence bias: if existence is good, longer existence should be better

Name: omission bias
Definition: tendency to judge harmful actions as worse, or less moral than equally harmful omissions (inactions) due to the fact that actions are more obvious than inactions
Example: John, a tennis player, would be facing a tough opponent the next day in a decisive match. John knows his opponent is allergic to a food substance. Subjects were presented with two conditions: John recommends the food containing the allergen to hurt his opponent's performance, or the opponent himself orders the allergenic food, and John says nothing. A majority of people judged that John's action of recommending the allergenic food as being more immoral than John's inaction of not informing the opponent of the allergenic substance

Name: positive bias
Definition: tendency to test hypotheses with positive rather than negative examples, risking to miss obvious disconfirming tests
Example: I am teaching a class, and I write upon the blackboard three numbers: 2-4-6. "I am thinking of a rule," I say, "which governs sequences of three numbers. The sequence 2-4-6, as it so happens, obeys this rule.
what is the rule?
Thus, someone who forms the hypothesis "numbers increasing by two" will test the triplet 8-10-12, hear that it fits, and confidently announce the rule. In every case the actual rule is the same: the three numbers must be in ascending order. But to discover this, you would have to generate triplets that shouldn't fit, such as 20-23-26, and see if they are labeled "No"

Name: examples of anchoring with numbers
Example: students shown "1 x 2 x 3 x 4 x 5 x 6 x 7 x 8" made a median estimate of 512, while students shown "8 x 7 x 6 x 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1" made a median estimate of 2,250.
Example2: Suppose I spin a Wheel of Fortune device as you watch, and it comes up pointing to 65. Then I ask: Do you think the percentage of African countries in the UN is above or below this number? What do you think is the percentage of African countries in the UN? Students who saw 65 on the Wheel gave 45%; those who saw 10 gave 25%.
Example3: watch out in salary negotiations, buying a car

Name: techniques for debiasing anchoring
Definition: throw out initial guess if it sounds implausible and try to come up with a new estimate rather than sliding
Definition2: try also to think of an anchor in the opposite direction—an anchor that is clearly too small or too large, instead of too large or too small—and dwell on it briefly.

Name: why is rationalization not going to help you form better beliefs
Definition: You cannot obtain more truth for a fixed proposition by arguing it; you can make more people believe it, but you cannot make it more true.

Name: scope insensitivity
Definition: The human brain can't emotionally represent large quantities
Example: three groups of subjects were asked how much they would pay to save 2000 / 20000 / 200000 migrating birds from drowning in uncovered oil ponds. The groups respectively answered $80, $78, and $88 [1]. This is scope insensitivity or scope neglect: the number of birds saved - the scope of the altruistic action - had little effect on willingness to pay.
Example2: Toronto residents would pay little more to clean up all polluted lakes in Ontario than polluted lakes in a particular region of Ontari
Example3: residents of four western US states would pay only 28% more to protect all 57 wilderness areas in those states than to protect a single area
Example4: Increasing the alleged risk of chlorinated drinking water from 0.004 to 2.43 annual deaths per 1000 - a factor of 600 - increased willingness-to-pay from $3.78 to $15.23

Name: representative heuristic in Bayesian terms
Definition: people judge the probability or frequency of a hypothesis by considering how much the hypothesis resembles available data as opposed to using a Bayesian calculation.
related to the conjunction fallacy e.g.
The moral? Adding more detail or extra assumptions can make an event seem more plausible, even though the event necessarily becomes less probable.
Example: statement 2 sounds more representative but statement 1 is far more probable (but less representative)

Name: why is self-deception difficult?
Definition: while you can't just choose to believe that people are good — you might say you believe that people are good but you will not anticipate as if this is true.
if you don't realize that self deception is so difficult, then you actually can fool yourself into believing that you've successfully deceived yourself.
Self deception is usually movitivated by you sincerely expecting to receive the benefits that you think come from this deception

Name: the peak end rule tells us that we do not judge our experiences on
Definition: * the net pleasantness or unpleasantness
* how long the experience lasted.
Instead we focus on PEAK (pleasant/unpleasant) and how it felt at the END

Name: duration neglect
Definition: duration of an episode insufficiently affects its valuation
Example: scientists showed subjects pleasant or aversive film clips. When reviewing the clips mentally at a later time, subjects did not appear to take the length of the stimuli into account, only as if they were a series of affective "snap shots"
Example2: subjects place their hands in painfully cold water. Under one set of instructions, they had to keep their hand in the water for an additional 30 seconds as the water was slowly heated to a warmer but still uncomfortably cold level, and under another set of instructions they were to remove their hand immediately. Otherwise both experiences were the same. Most subjects chose to repeat the longer experience.

Name: convenient overconfidence
Definition: We are more overconfident on tasks we don’t actually expect to perform, and when we don’t expect to have to explain our evaluation to others
* participants in task-unexpected conditions were unrealistically optimistic: They overestimated how well they would perform, often by a large margin, and their predictions were not correlated with their performance. By contrast, participants assigned to task-expected conditions made predictions that were not only less optimistic but strikingly accurate.

Name: overconfidence bias
Definition: asymmetric, over-weighting positive feedback relative to negative
Definition2: conservative, updating too little in response to both positive and negative signals
Conjdef: Dan Houser found that undergraduates tracking the evolution of their beliefs about their own relative performance on an IQ test as they receive noisy feedback.
Definition3: less pronounced when ego not at stake
Definition4: a substantial portion of subjects are averse to receiving information about their ability

Question: Probability theory says that a model which is consistently surprised on the data is
Answer: probably not a very good model
so - when surprised the important thing is to throw away the model, reshape your intuitions, and otherwise update yourself so that it doesn't happen again.
Beware: Some people affect to be unsurprised because it is a fakeable signal of competence.
Cialdini, on Bystander effect: Because we all prefer to appear poised and unflustered among others, we are likely to search for that evidence placidly, with brief, camouflaged glances at those around us. Therefore everyone is likely to see everyone else looking unruffled and failing to act

Name: if you catch yourself saying things like:
"I just don't understand how a PhD physicist can believe in astrology"
Definition: Well, if you literally don't understand, this indicates a problem with your model of human psychology. Perhaps you are indignant - you wish to express strong moral disapproval. But if you literally don't understand, then your indignation is stopping you from coming to terms with reality. Here: people comparmentalize

Name: how to deal with overconfidence bias and correct self evaluation
Definition: look for strong specific evidence

Name: selective reporting
Definition: selective reporting by the media or by social groups distorts reality
Remember: the frequency with which concepts occur in your thoughts need not reflect the frequency with which they occur in reality
Example: you may be tempted to compare your life success to Bill Gates - and suffer hedonic penalties accordingly. The objective frequency of Bill Gates is 0.00000000015, but you hear about him much more often. Conversely, 19% of the planet lives on less than $1/day, and I doubt that one fifth of the blog posts you read are written by them
Example2: dramatic tragedies makes them seem more frequent than more threatening albeit mundane risks. Subjects thought that accidents caused about as many deaths as disease; thought that homicide was a more frequent cause of death than suicide. Actually, diseases cause about 16 times as many deaths as accidents, and suicide is twice as frequent as homicide.

Name: availability bias and natural disasters
Definition: "the inability of individuals to conceptualize floods that have never occurred... Men on flood plains appear to be very much prisoners of their experience... Recently experienced floods appear to set an upward bound to the size of loss with which managers believe they ought to be concerned."
BUT - The wise would extrapolate from a memory of small hazards to the possibility of large hazards. Or better yet at historic records.

Name: what increases the dominance of perceptual heuristics over analytic deliberation?
Definition: time pressure, poor information, or distraction

Name: affect heuristic and upper bound percentages
Definition: Asked to measure approval for a life-saving measure at an airport subjects saving 150 lives had mean support of 10.4, while saving 98% of 150 lives had mean support of 13.6.
Example: saving 150 lives sounds vaguely good—is that a lot? a little?—while saving 98% of something is clearly very good because 98% is so close to the upper bound of the percentage scale

Name: affect heuristic and frequencies vs statistic reporting
Definition: subjects judged a disease as more dangerous when it was described as killing 1,286 people out of every 10,000, versus a disease that was 24.14% likely to be fatal.

Name: affect heuristic and familiarity
Definition: When judging familiar stocks, analysts' judgments of risks and returns were positively correlated, as conventionally predicted.
But when judging unfamiliar stocks, analysts tended to judge the stocks as if they were generally good or generally bad—low risk and high returns, or high risk and low returns - going against economic theory
familariy heuristic defn: They devised four lists of 39 names. Each list contained 19 female names and 20 male names. Half of the lists had famous female names, and the other half had famous male names. They showed the lists to two test groups. The first group was shown a list and asked to recall as many names as possible. The second group was shown a list and asked to determine if there were more female or more male names. The subjects who heard the list with famous female names said there were more female names than there were male names. Similarly, the subjects who heard the list with famous male names recalled more male names than female names. Thus the familiarity heuristic is defined as "judging events as more frequent or important because they are more familiar in memory."[1]

Name: special status needs special support
Definition: special positive (negative) status by pointing to positive (negative) attributes, saying, "Therefore I can assign it this very positive status!", but the same attributes belong to many other works that you don't grant the special positive status.
Example: Someone is praising the wisdom and poetry in religion. I retorted, "Tolkien's got great poetry, and some parts that are wise and some that are unwise; but you don't see people wearing little rings around their neck in memory of Frodo." Issue: If you justify the high status of the book of Job on the poetry then you must also exalt great works of literature

Name: anthropomorphism
Definition: the error of attributing distinctly human characteristics to nonhuman processes
Think of your brain as a high-ranking-solution-generator - a search process that produces solutions that rank high in your innate preference ordering. The solution space on all real-world problems is generally fairly large, which is why you need an efficient brain that doesn't even bother to formulate the vast majority of low-ranking solutions. e.g. group selection - no-one thought of cannibalism in insect population squeeze. Why? because that solution would shock human morality and wasn't even proferred as a possibility. We think "voluntary restraint in breeding" because that's how we would do it.
Example: Who's to say that the river doesn't have a will to move the water given that I have a will to move my muscles
Example2: That dogs have morality when evidence suggests that they wouldn't have needed to evolve it given the relative social simplicity of their lives
Example3: Thinking AI has to reason the same way as a speaker

Name: what is optimism
Definition: It is ranking the possibilities by your own preference ordering, and selecting an outcome high in that preference ordering, and somehow that outcome ends up as your prediction.
But Nature, or whatever other process is under discussion, is not actually, causally choosing between outcomes by ranking them in your preference ordering and picking a high one. So the brain fails to synchronize with the environment, and the prediction fails to match reality

Name: why is it so hard to convince others that they are wrong in political arguments
Definition: we have evolved an instinct to honestly believe that other people's goals, and our tribe's moral code, truly do imply that they should do things our way for their benefit - e.g. killing our rival Uglak
we are descended from those who argued most persuasively that the tribe's interest - not just their own interest - required that their hated rival Uglak be executed.

Name: correspondence bias
Definition: Overestimate the contribution of lasting traits and dispositions in determining people's behavior, as compared to situational effects
Example: When we see someone else kick a vending machine for no visible reason, we assume they are "an angry person". But when you yourself kick the vending machine, it's because the bus was late, the train was early, your report is overdue, and now the damned vending machine has eaten your lunch money for the second day in a row.
Example2: When subjects are told that a pro-abortion or anti-abortion speaker was randomly assigned to give a speech on that position, subjects still think the speakers harbor leanings in the direction randomly assigned. (We don't properly discount observed behaviour even when we are aware of the situation)
Example3: It seems quite intuitive to explain rain by water spirits;Reality usually involves more complicated mechanisms: an evaporation and condensation cycle underlying rain. But mechanisms sound more complicated than essences; they are harder to think of, less available. So when someone kicks a vending machine, we think they have an innate vending-machine-kicking-tendency - just like water spirits

Name: false consensus effect
Definition: we overestimate how likely others are to respond the same way we do
Drinking students considerably overestimate the fraction of fellow students who drink, but nondrinkers considerably underestimate the fraction. The "fundamental attribution error" refers to our tendency to overattribute others' behaviors to their dispositions, while reversing this tendency for ourselves.

Name: absurdity bias
Definition: attending to surface absurdity in the face of abstract information that ought to override it. we may find it hard to attend to mere calculations in the face of surface absurdity, until we see the balloon rise.
Example: In 1913 Lee de Forest was accused of fraud for selling stock in an impossible endeavor - phonecalls over the Atlantic.
Example2: people cannot accept that studies show that marginal spending on medicine has zero net effect, because it seems absurd - violating the surface rule that "medicine cures".

Name: affective death spiral
Definition: positive attributes of a theory, person, or organization combine with the Halo effect in a feedback loop, resulting in the subject of the affective death spiral being held in higher and higher regard - every positive thing said about the subject results in more than one additional nice thing to say about the subject.
The more phenomena you use your favored theory to explain, the truer your favored theory seems—has it not been confirmed by these many observations? As the theory seems truer, you will be more likely to question evidence that conflicts with it. As the favored theory seems more general, you will seek to use it in more explanations.
Example: A believing Communist sees the wisdom of Marx in every hamburger bought at McDonalds; in every promotion they're denied that would have gone to them in a true worker's paradise; in every election that doesn't go to their taste, in every newspaper article "slanted in the wrong direction".

Name: echo chamber
Definition: group of (usually media) sources that parrot each other by constantly and unquestioningly reporting a single, biased point of view, thus creating the illusion of consensus.

Name: illusion of transparency
Definition: misleading impression that your words convey more to others than they really do - systematically overestimate the effectiveness of communication.
We always know what we mean by our words, and so we expect others to know it too. Reading our own writing, the intended interpretation falls easily into place, guided by our knowledge of what we really meant. It's hard to empathize with someone who must interpret blindly, guided only by the words.
reasons:
* symbols are prone to misunderstanding. You use a word thinking it has a specific meaning by a convention; but the recipient of your message applies a different convention; what's worse, you usually have no way of knowing that.
* data loss: listener stops paying attention at a critical moment and misses something indispensable
* incorrect assumptions about prior knowledge - as audience size increases you ought to assume the audience knows less
-- If the message contains an instruction to drive straight ahead, B will be really puzzled when the road bifurcates in a Y-like manner. (It was always clear to A what driving straight ahead means there.

Name: explainers shoot high by aiming low
Definition: Explainers shoot way, way higher than they think they're aiming, thanks to the illusion of transparency and self-anchoring. We miss the mark by several major grades of expertise.
Why? Your words are far less helpful than you think - illusion of transparency and self-anchoring
* An eminent scientist once told me how he'd written an explanation of his field aimed at a much lower technical level than usual. He had thought it would be useful to academics outside the field, or even reporters. This ended up being one of his most popular papers within his field, cited more often than anything else he'd written.
* "An Intuitive Explanation of Bayesian Reasoning" was intended for elementary school students -> popular amongst undergraduates

Name: making beliefs pay rent
Definition: The rationalist virtue of empiricism consists of constantly asking which experiences our beliefs predict—or better yet, prohibit. Do you believe that phlogiston is the cause of fire? Then what do you expect to see happen, because of that? Do you believe that Wulky Wilkinsen is a post-utopian? Then what do you expect to see because of that? No, not "colonial alienation"; what experience will happen to you?
Above all, don't ask what to believe—ask what to anticipate.
Every guess of belief should begin by flowing to a specific guess of anticipation, and should continue to pay rent in future anticipations. If a belief turns deadbeat, evict it.

Name: give two examples of belief in belief outside of religions
Example: Economists realise that a sound currency depends on people believing that the currency is sound
Example2: scientists recognise that the actual objectivity of scientific studies on global warming is politically impotent unless people believe in that objectivity, so economists and scientists (among others) take steps to foster and protect such beliefs that they think are benign - sometimes even constructing systems of propaganda

Name: is it enough that a good consequentialist ought to be asking themselves is not "What happens in situation Y if I do X?"
Definition: What happens in general if I do X whenever I'm in situation Y", but "What happens in general if everyone at least as smart as me deduces that I would do X whenever I'm in situation Y"?
That, rather than the others, is the full exploration of the effects of choosing X in situation Y

Name: terminal vs instrumental values
Definition: "Instrumental values" are desirable strictly conditional on their anticipated consequences. "I want to administer penicillin to my sister", not because a penicillin-filled sister is an intrinsic good, but in anticipation of penicillin curing her flesh-eating pneumonia.
"Terminal values" are desirable without conditioning on other consequences: "I want to save my sister's life"

Name: phantom problem
Definition: problem primarily due to your own perceptions
Context: Thought biais
Example: feeling cold when it is 25 degrees
Extra: remember these are real problems - think about your perceptions; ask if you need medical or psychiatric help

Name: problem-solving - try blaming who first?
Definition: yourself
Do this with major issues like the environment or unemployment — ask, even momentarily—what you can do to start alleviating the issue, e.g. by starting a rally

Name: if you want to think you ought to ...
Definition: publish written thought
- if forces you to clarify your own thought as you prepare it for public scrutiny

Name: hawthorne effect
Definition: people change their behavior because they are being studied. [i.e. performance is impacted – possibly unconsciously – by possible positive or negative personal consequences unconsidered by the experimenter]
Gee, it seems everyone we scrutinize sticks to their diet!

Name: rhyme-as-reason effect
Definition: is a cognitive bias whereupon a saying or aphorism is judged as more accurate or truthful when it is rewritten to rhyme.
Example: the statement "What sobriety conceals, alcohol reveals" was judged to be more accurate than by different participants who saw "What sobriety conceals, alcohol unmasks"
Example2: For an example of the persuasive quality of the rhyme-as-reason effect, see "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit" the signature phrase used by Johnnie Cochran to gain acquittal for O.J. Simpson in Simpson's murder trial.

Name: Pygmalion effect
Definition: the greater the expectation placed upon people, the better they perform.
Example: if teachers were led to expect enhanced performance from some children (told the teachers that some kids spurters), then the children did indeed show that enhancement (higher IQ results)
Extra: opposite of the Golem effect

Name: less-is-better effect
Definition: preference reversal that occurs when the lesser or smaller alternative of a proposition is preferred when evaluated separately, but not evaluated together.
Example: participants perceived people giving away a $45 scarf as more generous than those who gave a cheap $55 coat.
Example2: a dinnerware set with 24 intact pieces was preferred over a dinnerware set of 31 pieces with a few broken pieces
Example3: seven ounces of ice cream overflowing in a small cup was preferred over eight ounces of ice cream in a much larger cup

Name: inequity aversion
Definition: humans are sensitive to inequities in favor of as well as those against them, and that some people attempt overcompensation when they feel "guilty" or unhappy to have received an undeserved reward
Example: dictator gameThe subject chooses how a reward should be split between himself and another subject. If the dictator acted self-interestedly, the split would consist of 0 for the partner and the full amount for the dictator. While the most common choice is indeed to keep everything, many dictators choose to give, with the second most common choice being the 50:50 split.
Example2: Employees compare not only relative salaries, but also relative performance against that of co-workers. Where these comparisons lead to guilt or envy, inequity aversion may lower employee morale. According to Bewley (1999), the main reason that managers create formal pay structures is so that the inter-employee comparison is seen to be "fair", which they considered "key" for morale and job performance
Example3: ultimatum game The dictator game is played, but the recipient is allowed to veto the entire deal, so that both subjects receive nothing. The partner typically vetos the deal when low offers are made. People consistently prefer getting nothing to receiving a small share of the pie. Rejecting the offer is in effect paying to punish the dictator

Name: why a rational agent experiment with their life and their routine?
Definition: Bayesian optimizing agent in an uncertain world, information has positive expected utility, and experiments have positive expected information
So try to overcome that deep-rooted sense of inoptimality you get when you consider new things, or revisit old ones. Locally inoptimal behavior can be worth it for the global benefits of the information you gain.

Name: Steel man
Definition: Refer to a position's or argument's improved form.
Page: https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Steel_man

Question: Why is «omission biais» only an alleged biais
Answer: Because it's a biais only if you're a consequentialist

Question: Common starting point of affective death spiral
Answer: something that feels good. A new political system that can save the world. A great leader, strong and noble and wise. An amazing tonic that can cure upset stomachs and cancer.