************
BONUS OPPORTUNITY - for 50 HOMEWORK BONUS POINTS
************

*   (will be added in Canvas in such a way that the effect will 
    be like ADDING 50 POINTS to ONE of your homework grades!!)

*   FOR THIS BONUS:

    1.  FIND an example of something containing a logical
        fallacy, IDENTIFY the fallacy (what type it is)

    2.  IN CLASS ON WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 
        SIGN the sign-up list at the beginning of class 
        saying you'd like to present that example fallacy

    3.  (I'll randomly choose the presentation order from this list,
        and when it is YOUR turn, you:) 
        *   with a 2 minute limit, 

        *   GIVE that example fallacy, and 
            
        *   EXPLAIN *why* that example IS that fallacy.

*   That's it! And you get 50 bonus homework points.

************
VIDEO with Dr. Neil DeGrasse-Tyson 
on human perceptions and logical fallacies:
************
*   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BRDCxNEuyg

    *   be careful -- what he is calling "argument from ignorance"
        is what (I think!) we would call
	"Questionable Cause" -- but I'll double check that;
        *   I'm considering it Questionable Cause because someone
            sees something in the sky they cannot identify, and 
            because they cannot identify it they reason that is
            because it is extra-terrestrials, BUT just seeing
            something they cannot identify is not sufficient
            evidence for the conclusion that that something is
	    extra-terrestrial;

    *   it is definitely not the same a "APPEAL TO ignorance",
        a fallacy of RELEVANCE in which one claims that
        a conclusion is true simply because no one has proven
	the conclusion to be false 

*******
aside: a few common patterns for the WEAK ANALOGY fallacy

*   2 things with several identified similarities
*   several things have only 1 or 2 identified similarities
*   JUST to assert, without further elaboration,
    that 2 cases are relevantly similar

three things to HELP critically evaluate an argument
    (to tell a reasonable inductive argument from one
    committing the fallacy of weak analogy):
    1.  try to list the important similarities between the cases
    2.  try to list the important dissimilarities between the cases
    3.  decide whether, on balance, the similarities are 
        strong enough to support the conclusion --
	whether the similarities or the dissimilarities are
	more important;