Is This Argument Inductive or Deductive? What Fallacy Is It Committing?
Question by : Is this argument inductive or deductive? What fallacy is it committing?
“Theyclaim that the Illinois Department of Corrections’ drug treatment program at Sheridan penitentiary discharged inmates who were “40 percent less likely to be arrested a year later and 85 percent less likely to return to prison.” This statistic stating incredible success indicates the data should be re-checked because it is probably false, or it misinterprets the rate of recidivism from the treatment program.
A drug treatment venue claiming a rate of success approaching 85 percent for criminals with chronic addiction issues would be the world’s best program, and it seems way too good to be true.
Another issue that merits clarification is the failure to fully analyze the statistic regarding prisoners convicted for drug cases. Many of these criminals are guilty of illicit activities above and beyond punishing people for using illegal drugs. Virtually no one goes to prison for a simple felony possession of drugs unless they have a long track record of violating probation, evading the readily available treatment programs or have a multitude of arrest issues in their background.”
PLEASE HELP! I need to understand this in order to help me study for an upcoming exam.
Best answer:
Answer by ? Brian ?
It is an inductive argument because it is based upon human experience and probability. As opposed to deductive, where the conclusion would have to necessarily follow from the premises, logically.
Answer by Ardi Pithecus ™
It is DEductive, because induction is derived from direct experience to direct conclusion. Example; you are outside; you feel the heat of the sun; you conclude “The sun is out”. Induction is simply “this from that” reasoning, whereas deduction goes through the motions of thinking things through; but if not thought through by the rules of valid deductive logic, then you get an invalid conclusion, which is called a fallacy.
The fallacy lies in the first two words, “They claim”. This is the fallacy of Appeal to Anonymous Authority. The speaker accepts “them” without proof of who they are.
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#they_say
The second fallacy is accepting that what they say is actually what the Illinois Department of Corrections’ drug treatment program at Sheridan penitentiary said. But that is unimportant because there are other fallacies, too, and it is the very first one that denies the validity of the argument.
Christie touts drug court program in accepting award from Somerset County …
Last year, Christie signed into law an expansion of the state's drug court program, which will be phased in statewide over five years. It mandates that non-violent drug offenders be sentenced to treatment programs instead of prison. Now Christie, a … Read more on NorthJersey.com
Watertown man faces 6 years in prison for drug sale try
4 to six years in prison, followed by an additional three years of supervision upon his release. Judge Kim H. Martusewicz will mandate he serve his sentence in the prison system's Willard Drug Treatment Program. Inmates who complete the 90-day program … Read more on WatertownDailyTimes.com
Two former Oklahoma prisoners endorse value of addiction programs
Rob Standridge said he requested a study to highlight the role that drug addiction plays in Oklahoma's incarceration rate and said programs that could potentially divert drug-addicted criminal offenders from the state prison system hold promise. “We're … Read more on NewsOK.com