My interesting concept for this week is the summary box on page 90. I think it is really well written on why we should reject of accept a claim. More specifically, why we should accept a claim when “it is being made by a reputable authority whom we can trust as an expert about this kind of claim and who has no motive to mislead.” The “expert” and “motive” parts are what have changed the way I think when someone is trying to tell me something. For example, if I want to buy a car and I have narrowed it down to a CR-Z and a Prius, would I trust the opinion of my dad and brother? Before reading this chapter, I would believe them in an instant, but know I would have to think about it. Both cars are hybrids are both dad and brother have experience with owning and driving one. My brother is a mechanic so he has a leg up on maintenance and technical specs. That makes him the expert. When it comes to motive, I do not think my dad would care which car I got. My brother on the other hand would probably say something in favor of the CR-Z because of its better looks since he would be the one working on it and driving it on occasion. I have to be careful about not being too gullible now.
No comments:
Post a Comment