Discuss Questions. Ad Hoc Reasoning. Social Sciences Essay

Discussion Questions
Student’s Name
Institution
Discussion Questions
Ad Hoc Reasoning
Ad hoc reasoning is a fallacious form of reasoning employed by a person to salvage an original claim after it has been effectively disputed (Cline, 2017). It is a faulty explanation offered to counter a justified argument. Although someone can be inclined to believe it, ad hoc reasoning is characterized by incoherence and lack of justifiable evidence. As shown by Cline (2017), the explanation provided in ad hoc reasoning is expected to be relevant only in the situation at hand. Therefore, the explanation cannot act as a general principle that is applicable in a broader context. Another feature of ad hoc reasoning is that it is in contradiction with some other basic hypothesis. This could be a hypothesis that was originally accepted by the subject. Ad hoc reasoning also does not have testable consequences. The reasoning provided by the person to counter a valid argument cannot be objectively tested. As such, ad hoc reasoning does not intend in any way to offer a valid explanation but to salvage an original point and to help the person hang on to a preconceived position.
While I am not proud of them, there are instances in my life that I have had to employ ad hoc reasoning to get out of situations. A while ago, I was having a discussion with a friend about racism and I happened to mention that Trump is the most racist president America has had. Well, the friend explained that the country has had outright racist presidents, many of whom oversaw unspeakable racist acts against people of color during the slavery era. I knew he was right and I blurted “well, Trump is a pedophile.” In this ...