Unit 4. Reason as a way of knowing. Tuesday, March 4, 14


 Hollie Harris
 3 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 Unit 4 Reason as a way of knowing
2 I. Reasoning At its core, reasoning is using what is known as building blocks to create new knowledge I use the words logic and reasoning interchangeably. Technically, logic is reasoning conducted according to formal rules.
3 II. Basic terminology Arguments Premises and conclusions Inductive v. deductive Fallacies
4 III. Induction A. Definitions Inductive reasoning uses observed experience to make judgments about the unobserved Inductive reasoning uses the past to predict the future Inductive reasoning assumes that nature/reality follows predictable patterns
5 IV. Deduction A. Definitions
6 III. Induction B. Significance Inductive reasoning is the most common form of reasoning we use List three examples of how you have reasoned inductively today Inductive reasoning is the basis for science Inductive reasoning works  it is pragmatic
7 III. Induction C. Three basic types 3 examples: Small pox Politics Education Public health of inductive arguments Induction by generalization or enumeration Induction by analogy Causal induction Which type of inductive argument is each of the above examples?
8 Assignment Read and annotate the two short articles Rewrite each article as a standard form argument with 24 premises and 1 conclusion Review the paper assignment. How might these articles be relevant to the paper assignment?
9 III. Induction C. Three basic types 3 examples: Small pox Politics Education Public health of inductive arguments Induction by generalization or enumeration Induction by analogy Causal induction Which type of inductive argument is each of the above examples?
10 C. Assessing Inductive arguments Three general principles Does the argument start with justified premises? Does the argument include all relevant information? Is the argument valid? (does acceptance of the premises justify acceptance of the conclusion?)
11 Example 1 1. Carbon dioxide does not trap heat in the atmosphere 2. Global average temperatures have been shown to fluctuate widely over time Therefore: The current increase in global temperatures is the results from natural rather than manmade factors
12 Example 2 1. Global warming causes unusual weather events 2. This week s deep freeze in the central and eastern parts of the country was an unusual weather event Therefore: This week s deep freeze was caused by global warming
13 Example 3 1. Global warming leads to temperature increases 2. This week s deep freeze in the central and eastern parts of the country saw temperatures plummet Therefore: Global warming is not true
14 C. Assessing Inductive arguments Assessing enumerative arguments (3 questions) On how many cases is the conclusion based? Are the cases examined representative? Could other conclusions be drawn?
15 C. Assessing Inductive arguments Assessing analogical arguments How many times does the analogy apply? In what number of respects are the things involved analogous? What is the strength of the conclusion relative to the strength of the premises? How many dissimilarities are there between the two things being compared? Is the analogy relevant?
16 C. Assessing Inductive arguments Assessing Causal arguments Is the causal claim a good explanation for the observed correlation? (Is the correlation serial rather than causal) Is there any other reasonable explanation for the correlation?
17 Informal fallacies This section of the presentation is drawn from materials on the website of the Texas State University Department of Philosophy website. (Accessed on at
18 Ad Hominem (Attacking the person): This fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, you irrelevantly attack the person or some aspect of the person who is making the argument. The fallacious attack can also be direct to membership in a group or institution.
19 Appeal to ignorance This fallacy occurs when you argue that your conclusion must be true, because there is no evidence against it. This fallacy wrongly shifts the burden of proof away from the one making the claim.
20 Begging the question The fallacy of begging the question occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it. In other words, you assume without proof the stand/position, or a significant part of the stand, that is in question. Begging the question is also called arguing in a circle.
21 Confusion of Necessary with a Sufficient Condition A causal fallacy you commit this fallacy when you assume that a necessary condition of an event is sufficient for the event to occur. A necessary condition is a condition that must be present for an event to occur. A sufficient condition is a condition or set of conditions that will produce the event. A necessary condition must be there, but it alone does not provide sufficient cause for the occurrence of the event. Only the sufficient grounds can do this. In other words, all of the necessary elements must be there.
22 Equivocation The fallacy of equivocation occurs when a key term or phrase in an argument is used in an ambiguous way, with one meaning in one portion of the argument and then another meaning in another portion of the argument.
23 False dilemma When you reason from an eitheror position and you haven't considered all relevant possibilities you commit the fallacy of false dilemma.
24 Irrelevant Authority The fallacy of irrelevant authority is committed when you accept without proper support for his or her alleged authority, a person's claim or proposition as true. Alleged authorities should only be used when the authority is reporting on his or her field of expertise, the authority is reporting on facts about which there is some agreement in his or her field, and you have reason to believe he or she can be trusted. Alleged authorities can be individuals or groups. The attempt to appeal to the majority or the masses is a form of irrelevant authority. The attempt to appeal to an elite or select group is a form of irrelevant authority.
25 Red Herring This fallacy consists in diverting attention from the real issue by focusing instead on an issue having only a surface relevance to the first.
26 Slippery Slope In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. The slippery slope involves an acceptance of a succession of events without direct evidence that this course of events will happen.
27 Straw man This fallacy occurs when, in attempting to refute another person's argument, you address only a weak or distorted version of it. Straw person is the misrepresentation of an opponent's position or a competitor's product to tout one's own argument or product as superior. This fallacy occurs when the weakest version of an argument is attacked while stronger ones are ignored.
28 Two wrongs If you try to justify an act/belief by pointing out in others a similar act/belief, you are committing the fallacy of "two wrongs make a right." This fallacy can occur by suggesting "if others are doing it, I can too" (common practice). Another form of the fallacy occurs when you dismiss a criticism of your action/belief, because your critic is acting/ believing in a similar way (you do it, too).
29 IV. Deduction A. Definitions Deduction  Truth preserving! Truth  What is the case Validity  Whether a conclusion follows from its premises Syllogism  A deductive argument with exactly two premises and a conclusion which uses categorical propositions to express relationships between three terms Critical Note: Truth and validity are independent! True premises may lead to an invalid conclusion and false premises may lead to a valid conclusion!
30 Anatomy of a syllogism The term which doesn t appear in the conclusion is the middle term All violists are clever All virtuosos are a violists Therefore: virtuosos are clever The subject of the conclusion is the minor term The predicate nominative of the conclusion is the major term
31 Anatomy of a syllogism Categorical propositions are assertions about classes of objects which affirm or deny that one class is included in another either in whole or in part. All violists are clever All virtuosos are a violists Therefore: virtuosos are clever It is because syllogisms always contain categorical propositions that they are often called categorical syllogisms
32 4 types of categorical propositions Universal affirmative  A propositions All violinists are talented Universal negative  E propositions No violinists are mean AffIrmo nego Particular affirmative  I propositions Some violinists are lefthanded Particular negative  O propositions Some violinists are not Democrats
33 Using the definitions just provided, write three valid arguments that meet the following conditions: Two true premises and a true conclusion Two true premises and a false conclusion One true and one false premise and a true conclusion
34 B. Assessing the validity of categorical syllogisms
35 Assessing syllogisms diagrams using Venn diagrams First Draw a triple Venn diagram, numbering the quadrants as shown. Second  Label the circles of a three circle Venn diagram with the syllogism s three terms. It is customary to label the top left circle as the minor term, the top right circle as the major term and the bottom circle as the middle term. Third Diagram any universal premises by shading the areas excluded by those premises. Remember, the shaded areas are those excluded by the premise. Fourth Diagram any particular premises by placing an x either Completely within a circle if it is clear from the premises that the particular term is wholly included in the circle Or On a line if the premises do not determine on which side of the line it should go Finally Inspect the diagram to see if the diagram of the premises is consistent with the conclusion. 1 All violists are clever All virtuosos are violists Therefore: All virtuosos are clever Virtuosos Violists Clever 3 6
36 Assessing the validity of syllogisms using Venn diagrams Virtuosos Clever No No 4 No 5 Valid 6 All violists are clever All virtuosos are violists Therefore: All virtuosos are clever No 7 Violists
37 Assessing the validity of syllogisms using Venn diagrams Apples Bland 1 2 Invalid 5 Some 3 4 No 6 All crunchy things are apples Some bland things are crunchy things Therefore: All apples are bland things No 7 Crunchy
38 All syllogisms can be expressed symbolically, since each of the terms simply represents a variable A C 1 2 Invalid 5 Some 3 4 No 6 All B are A Some C are B Therefore: All A are C No 7 B
39 Nonsense words are fun, too Bingles WootWoots 1 2 Invalid 5 Some 3 4 No 6 All Bangles are Bingles Some WootWoots are Bangles Therefore: All Bingles are WootWoots No 7 Bangles
40 An online venn diagram tool can be found at: venn.cgi?exercise=6.3a venn.cgi
41 Other means of assessing categorical syllogisms Mood and figure The Mood of a categorical syllogism is the series of three letters representing each proposition (AffIrmo, nego) Thus All A are B No B are C Therefore: All C are A Would be in the Mood AEA
42 Other means of assessing categorical syllogisms Mood and figure The figure of a categorical syllogism has to do with the position of the middle term We can draw lines through the middle terms in each of these four diagrams to create a collarlike shape, like this: Accessed on at
43 Aristotle, you re the man, but don t fool with Boole!
44 Aristotle, you re the man, but don t fool with Boole! All A are B No B are C Therefore: Invalid! All C are A Mood = AEA Figure = 4
45 Ooh! Ooh! It s invalid when we do then Venn too! C A No No 5 Invalid No 6 No All A are B No B are C Therefore: All C are A 7 B
46 Other means of assessing categorical syllogisms Formal fallacies  No syllogism that commits one of the following formal fallacies is valid Fallacy of the undistributed middles  Any syllogism in which the middle term is undistributed (to be distributed means all members of a term s class are affected by the proposition*) is invalid. Fallacy of Illicit Major/Illicit Minor  If a term is distributed in the conclusion, it must be distributed in one of the premises or the argument is invalid. Fallacy of Exclusive premises  Any categorical syllogism with two negative premises is invalid Fallacy of Affirmative Conclusion/Negative Premise and Negative Conclusion/ Affirmative Premise  If an argument has a negative conclusion, one of the premises must be negative; if one of the premises is negative, the conclusion must be negative. Existential fallacy  If both of the premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular (Boole only) *A term is said to be distributed if it is either the subject of a universal or the predicate of a negative.
47 An now we can name the reason why this argument is invalid C A No No All A are B No B are C Therefore: All C are A 4 5 No No Fallacy of Affirmative Conclusion/NegativePremise 7 6 B
48 No Mr. Haydock, not another way to test validity! But wait, this one s so much fun... Remember that the conclusion of a valid syllogism must be true if the premises are true. So... If we take any syllogism and substitute premises which we know to be true (taking care to make sure the form is the same), if the the conclusion is true, the syllogism is valid. This is called assessing by substitution/counter example.
49 Let s try it! All A are B No B are C Therefore: All C are A All ferns are plants No plants are dogs Therefore: All dogs are ferns All Giggles are Googles All Sniglets are Giggles Therefore: All Sniglets are Googles All sharks are fish All Great Whites are sharks Therefore: All Great Whites are fish
50 Two other types of syllogism Disjunctive syllogisms Hypothetical syllogisms
51 Disjunctive syllogisms A disjunction is a statement that claims that at least one of two possibilities is true. For example: Either A or B Not A Therefore B
52 Inclusive or exclusive In common usage or is used exclusively: Entrees come with fries or coleslaw means you can get fries of coleslaw, but not both. But in logic (and computer science) or is generally inclusive, meaning that at least one of a series must be true (but both could be).
53 Disjunctive syllogisms Assuming the inclusive or, determine whether the following are valid or invalid. Be prepared to explain why you believe each statement is valid or invalid. Remember, validity means the conclusion must follow Either A or B A Invalid Therefore B Either not A or B A Valid Therefore B Either A or not both B and C A Therefore both B and C Invalid Either Fido ran away or he was hit by a car Fido ran away Therefore: Fido did not get hit by a car Invalid
54 Hypothetical syllogisms Hypothetical syllogisms are two premise deductive arguments in which (at least) one premise is a conditional (if) statement. There are two types of hypothetical syllogisms: Pure hypotheticals Mixed hypotheticals
55 Pure hypothetical syllogisms In a pure hypothetical syllogism, both premises are hypothetical statements If Gandalf fails then Godor Falls If Godor falls then the Shadow will triumph Therefore: If Gandalf fails then the Shadow will triumph Symbolically If p then q if q then r Therefore: If p then r The other valid form: If Mary comes to the party then Dale will not come If Dale does not come, then Ernie will not come Symbolically If p then not r If not r, then not q Therefore: If p then not q Therefore: If Mary comes to the party then Ernie will not come
56 Mixed hypothetical syllogisms In a mixed hypothetical syllogism, there is a conditional premise followed by a premise which registers agreement or disagreement with either the antecedent or the consequent of the conditional. The antecedent is if part of the statement, while the consequent is the then part of the statement There are two valid and two invalid forms of mixed hypothetical syllogism:
57 Valid mixed hypothetical syllogisms Modus Ponens (AA) If Legolas is an elf, then he is immortal Legolas is an elf Therefore: Legolas is immortal Symbolically If p then q p Therefore: q Modus Tolens (DC) If we are the only life in the universe, then the universe sucks The universe does not suck Therefore: We are not the only life in the universe Symbolically If p then q not q Therefore: not p
58 Are the following valid or invalid? Why? 1. If Andy is here then I am not late Andy is here Therefore: I am not late Valid  AA 3. If I am lying then Kant is right Kant is right Therefore: I am not not Lying Invalid  AC 5. If A then B If B the C Therefore: If A then C Valid HS 2. If Andy is here then I am not late If I am not late then I will pass Therefore: If Andy is not here then I will not pass Invalid HS 4. If A then B Not B Therefore: Not A Valid  DC 6. If there are monkeys then there will be trees There are no monkeys Therefore: There are no trees Invalid  DA
59 Logic and computer science Logic is an essential component of how computers work We will be doing a small project to demonstrate the connection between computers and logic from codeacademy.org
60 JavaScript basics for our project Declare a variable: var dogs Assign a value to a variable var dogs = 1.5 var dogs = rock var dogs = prompt( What is your favorite animal? ) Key concept  variables can change their value! in JS = is used to assign variables, mathematical equivalency is indicated by ===
61 JavaScript basics for our project If statement syntax if(some condition) {some action;} else {some action;} if/else if/else syntax if(some condition) {some action;} else if (some condition) {some action;} else {some action;} Key concept  syntax matters!
62 JavaScript basics for our project console.log  prints something to the console console.log( some string ); return  returns a value and stops a function return you are right!
63 Functions Functions are special variables that, when called, carry out a specific task. Function syntax var functionname=function(argument1, argument2) {instructions to be carried out be the function} The function we will write will contain some if/else statements which will return various strings. Calling a function  Functions do nothing until called. When a function is called, it will carry out its assigned task. Syntax for calling a function: functionname(argument1, argument2) The arguments in our case will be variables that we have previously defined and assigned values to.
64 Logic Unit Quiz On Monday we will have a culminating quiz on the logic unit. The quiz will count for 100 points in the minor assignments category. The quiz will be open notes You will be asked to do the following on the quiz: 1.Explain the difference between inductive and deductive reason. 2.Examine three inductive arguments and identify the informal fallacy that they commit (I will be fairly obvious here). 3.Assess whether or not two fallacies are valid categorical syllogisms using the venn diagram method and one other method (not substitution). 4.Identify whether three arguments are hypothetical or disjunctive syllogisms and assess the validity of each. 5.Briefly explain (one paragraph) why logic and coding are similar.
65 1 2 3 Arguments Therefore: Arguments Therefore:
Unit 4. Reason as a way of knowing
Unit 4 Reason as a way of knowing Zendo The Master will present two Koans  one that follows the rule and one that does not. Teams will take turns presenting their own koans to the master to see if they
More informationWhat is reason? The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic
WoK 3 Reason What is reason? Webster s Dictionary defines reason as: The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic and logic as: reasoning conducted or assessed according
More informationWhat is reason? The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic
WoK 3 Reason What is reason? Webster s Dictionary defines reason as: The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic and logic as: reasoning conducted or assessed according
More informationStudy Guides. Chapter 1  Basic Training
Study Guides Chapter 1  Basic Training Argument: A group of propositions is an argument when one or more of the propositions in the group is/are used to give evidence (or if you like, reasons, or grounds)
More informationBaronett, Logic (4th ed.) Chapter Guide
Chapter 6: Categorical Syllogisms Baronett, Logic (4th ed.) Chapter Guide A. Standardform Categorical Syllogisms A categorical syllogism is an argument containing three categorical propositions: two premises
More informationLogic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic
Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic Standardizing and Diagramming In Reason and the Balance we have taken the approach of using a simple outline to standardize short arguments,
More informationMCQ IN TRADITIONAL LOGIC. 1. Logic is the science of A) Thought. B) Beauty. C) Mind. D) Goodness
MCQ IN TRADITIONAL LOGIC FOR PRIVATE REGISTRATION TO BA PHILOSOPHY PROGRAMME 1. Logic is the science of. A) Thought B) Beauty C) Mind D) Goodness 2. Aesthetics is the science of .
More informationUnit. Categorical Syllogism. What is a syllogism? Types of Syllogism
Unit 8 Categorical yllogism What is a syllogism? Inference or reasoning is the process of passing from one or more propositions to another with some justification. This inference when expressed in language
More informationA R G U M E N T S I N A C T I O N
ARGUMENTS IN ACTION Descriptions: creates a textual/verbal account of what something is, was, or could be (shape, size, colour, etc.) Used to give you or your audience a mental picture of the world around
More informationWhat is an argument? PHIL 110. Is this an argument? Is this an argument? What about this? And what about this?
What is an argument? PHIL 110 Lecture on Chapter 3 of How to think about weird things An argument is a collection of two or more claims, one of which is the conclusion and the rest of which are the premises.
More informationDeduction. Of all the modes of reasoning, deductive arguments have the strongest relationship between the premises
Deduction Deductive arguments, deduction, deductive logic all means the same thing. They are different ways of referring to the same style of reasoning Deduction is just one mode of reasoning, but it is
More informationMPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic
MPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic Making and Refuting Arguments Steps of an Argument You make a claim The conclusion of your
More informationSYLLOGISTIC LOGIC CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS
Prof. C. Byrne Dept. of Philosophy SYLLOGISTIC LOGIC Syllogistic logic is the original form in which formal logic was developed; hence it is sometimes also referred to as Aristotelian logic after Aristotle,
More information5.6.1 Formal validity in categorical deductive arguments
Deductive arguments are commonly used in various kinds of academic writing. In order to be able to perform a critique of deductive arguments, we will need to understand their basic structure. As will be
More informationCHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument
CHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument General Overview: As our students often attest, we all live in a complex world filled with demanding issues and bewildering challenges. In order to determine those
More informationVenn Diagrams and Categorical Syllogisms. Unit 5
Venn Diagrams and Categorical Syllogisms Unit 5 John Venn 1834 1923 English logician and philosopher noted for introducing the Venn diagram Used in set theory, probability, logic, statistics, and computer
More informationLOGICAL FALLACIES/ERRORS OF ARGUMENT
LOGICAL FALLACIES/ERRORS OF ARGUMENT Deduction Fallacies Term Definition Example(s) 1 Equivocation Ambiguity 2 types: The word or phrase may be ambiguous, in which case it has more than one distinct meaning
More information5.3 The Four Kinds of Categorical Propositions
M05_COI1396_13_E_C05.QXD 11/13/07 8:39 AM age 182 182 CHATER 5 Categorical ropositions Categorical propositions are the fundamental elements, the building blocks of argument, in the classical account of
More informationCritical Thinking 5.7 Validity in inductive, conductive, and abductive arguments
5.7 Validity in inductive, conductive, and abductive arguments REMEMBER as explained in an earlier section formal language is used for expressing relations in abstract form, based on clear and unambiguous
More informationPortfolio Project. Phil 251A Logic Fall Due: Friday, December 7
Portfolio Project Phil 251A Logic Fall 2012 Due: Friday, December 7 1 Overview The portfolio is a semesterlong project that should display your logical prowess applied to realworld arguments. The arguments
More informationChapter 8  Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall Stetson University Chapter 8  Sentential ruth ables and Argument orms 8.1 Introduction he truthvalue of a given truthfunctional compound proposition depends
More informationRelevance. Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true
Relevance Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true Premises are irrelevant when they do not 1 Non Sequitur Latin for it does
More informationSHORT ANSWER. Write the word or phrase that best completes each statement or answers the question.
Exam Name SHORT ANSWER. Write the word or phrase that best completes each statement or answers the question. Draw a Venn diagram for the given sets. In words, explain why you drew one set as a subset of
More informationPart II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments
Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments Week 4: Propositional Logic and Truth Tables Lecture 4.1: Introduction to deductive logic Deductive arguments = presented as being valid, and successful only
More informationLogic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE
CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE Section 1. A Mediate Inference is a proposition that depends for proof upon two or more other propositions, so connected together by one or
More informationA short introduction to formal logic
A short introduction to formal logic Dan Hicks v0.3.2, July 20, 2012 Thanks to Tim Pawl and my Fall 2011 Intro to Philosophy students for feedback on earlier versions. My approach to teaching logic has
More informationChapter 1. What is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life
Chapter 1 What is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life Why Study Philosophy? Defining Philosophy Studying philosophy in a serious and reflective way will change you as a person Philosophy Is
More informationLogic Book Part 1! by Skylar Ruloff!
Logic Book Part 1 by Skylar Ruloff Contents Introduction 3 I Validity and Soundness 4 II Argument Forms 10 III Counterexamples and Categorical Statements 15 IV Strength and Cogency 21 2 Introduction This
More informationPractice Test Three Fall True or False True = A, False = B
Practice Test Three Fall 2015 True or False True = A, False = B 1. The inclusive "or" means "A or B or both A and B." 2. The conclusion contains both the major term and the middle term. 3. "If, then" statements
More informationThe antecendent always a expresses a sufficient condition for the consequent
Critical Thinking Lecture Four October 5, 2012 Chapter 3 Deductive Argument Patterns Diagramming Arguments Deductive Argument Patterns  There are some common patterns shared by many deductive arguments
More information1. To arrive at the truth we have to reason correctly. 2. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. B. DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
I. LOGIC AND ARGUMENTATION 1 A. LOGIC 1. To arrive at the truth we have to reason correctly. 2. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. 3. It doesn t attempt to determine how people in fact reason. 4.
More information1 Clarion Logic Notes Chapter 4
1 Clarion Logic Notes Chapter 4 Summary Notes These are summary notes so that you can really listen in class and not spend the entire time copying notes. These notes will not substitute for reading the
More informationThe Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments)
The Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments) Adapted from: An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments: Learn the lost art of making sense by Ali Almossawi *Not, by any stretch of the imagination,
More informationCRITICAL THINKING. Formal v Informal Fallacies
CRITICAL THINKING FAULTY REASONING (VAUGHN CH. 5) LECTURE PROFESSOR JULIE YOO Formal v Informal Fallacies Irrelevant Premises Genetic Fallacy Composition Division Appeal to the Person (ad hominem/tu quoque)
More informationIn view of the fact that IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES
IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES Instructions: Determine whether the following are propositions. If some are not propositions, see if they can be rewritten as propositions. (1) I have a very refined sense of smell.
More informationRevisiting the Socrates Example
Section 1.6 Section Summary Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic Using Rules of Inference to Build Arguments Rules of Inference for Quantified Statements Building Arguments for Quantified
More informationLogic, reasoning and fallacies. Example 0: valid reasoning. Decide how to make a random choice. Valid reasoning. Random choice of X, Y, Z, n
Logic, reasoning and fallacies and some puzzling Before we start Introductory Examples Karst Koymans Informatics Institute University of Amsterdam (version 16.3, 2016/11/21 12:58:26) Wednesday, November
More informationGENERAL NOTES ON THIS CLASS
PRACTICAL LOGIC Bryan Rennie GENERAL NOTES ON THE CLASS EXPLANATION OF GRADES AND POINTS, ETC. SAMPLE QUIZZES SCHEDULE OF CLASSES THE SIX RULES OF SYLLOGISMS (and corresponding fallacies) SYMBOLS USED
More informationLogic: A Brief Introduction. Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University 2012 CONTENTS Part I Critical Thinking Chapter 1 Basic Training 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Logic, Propositions and Arguments 1.3 Deduction and Induction
More informationINTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms
1 GLOSSARY INTERMEDIATE LOGIC BY JAMES B. NANCE INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms This glossary includes terms that are defined in the text in the lesson and on the page noted. It does not include
More informationThe Philosopher s World Cup
The Philosopher s World Cup Monty Python & the Flying Circus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vv3qgagck&feature=related What is an argument? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqfkti6gn9y What is an argument?
More informationPhilosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI
Philosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI Precising definition Theoretical definition Persuasive definition Syntactic definition Operational definition 1. Are questions about defining a phrase
More informationPHILOSOPHY 102 INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC PRACTICE EXAM 1. W# Section (10 or 11) 4. T F The statements that compose a disjunction are called conjuncts.
PHILOSOPHY 102 INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC PRACTICE EXAM 1 W# Section (10 or 11) 1. True or False (5 points) Directions: Circle the letter next to the best answer. 1. T F All true statements are valid. 2. T
More informationChapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111)
Chapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111) Neils Bohr (1885 1962) to Einstein: You are not thinking. You are merely being logical. Reason is one of the four ways of knowing: Perception Language Emotion
More informationChapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic)
Chapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic) There's no easy way to say this, the material you're about to learn in this chapter can be pretty hard for some students. Other students, on the other
More informationLogical (formal) fallacies
Fallacies in academic writing Chad Nilep There are many possible sources of fallacy an idea that is mistakenly thought to be true, even though it may be untrue in academic writing. The phrase logical fallacy
More informationL4: Reasoning. Dani Navarro
L4: Reasoning Dani Navarro Deductive reasoning Inductive reasoning Informal reasoning WE talk of man* being the rational animal; and the traditional intellectualist philosophy has always made a great point
More informationAPPENDIX A CRITICAL THINKING MISTAKES
APPENDIX A CRITICAL THINKING MISTAKES Critical thinking is reasonable and reflective thinking aimed at deciding what to believe and what to do. Throughout this book, we have identified mistakes that a
More informationBasic Concepts and Skills!
Basic Concepts and Skills! Critical Thinking tests rationales,! i.e., reasons connected to conclusions by justifying or explaining principles! Why do CT?! Answer: Opinions without logical or evidential
More informationPractice Test Three Spring True or False True = A, False = B
Practice Test Three Spring 2015 True or False True = A, False = B 1. A sound argument is a valid deductive argument with true premisses. 2. A conclusion is a statement of support. 3. An easy way to determine
More informationPART III  Symbolic Logic Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University 7.1 Introduction PART III  Symbolic Logic Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions What has been made abundantly clear in the previous discussion
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Ethics
Philosophy 1100: Ethics Topic 1  Course Introduction: 1. What is Philosophy? 2. What is Ethics? 3. Logic a. Truth b. Arguments c. Validity d. Soundness What is Philosophy? The Three Fundamental Questions
More informationAlso, in Argument #1 (Lecture 11, Slide 11), the inference from steps 2 and 3 to 4 is stated as:
by SALVATORE  5 September 2009, 10:44 PM I`m having difficulty understanding what steps to take in applying valid argument forms to do a proof. What determines which given premises one should select to
More informationLogic: The Science that Evaluates Arguments
Logic: The Science that Evaluates Arguments Logic teaches us to develop a system of methods and principles to use as criteria for evaluating the arguments of others to guide us in constructing arguments
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 1. Background Material for the Exercise on Validity
Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics Critical Thinking Lecture 1 Background Material for the Exercise on Validity Reasons, Arguments, and the Concept of Validity 1. The Concept of Validity Consider
More informationFull file at
Chapter 1 What is Philosophy? Summary Chapter 1 introduces students to main issues and branches of philosophy. The chapter begins with a basic definition of philosophy. Philosophy is an activity, and addresses
More informationLogic: A Brief Introduction
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University PART III  Symbolic Logic Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions 7.1 Introduction What has been made abundantly clear in the previous discussion
More informationLogic Dictionary Keith BurgessJackson 12 August 2017
Logic Dictionary Keith BurgessJackson 12 August 2017 addition (Add). In propositional logic, a rule of inference (i.e., an elementary valid argument form) in which (1) the conclusion is a disjunction
More informationPHIL2642 CRITICAL THINKING USYD NOTES PART 1: LECTURE NOTES
PHIL2642 CRITICAL THINKING USYD NOTES PART 1: LECTURE NOTES LECTURE CONTENTS LECTURE 1: CLAIMS, EXPLAINATIONS AND ARGUMENTS LECTURE 2: CONDITIONS AND DEDUCTION LECTURE 3: MORE DEDUCTION LECTURE 4: MEANING
More informationLOGIC. Inductive Reasoning. Wednesday, April 20, 16
LOGIC Inductive Reasoning Inductive Reasoning Arguments reason from the specific to the general. It is important because this reasoning is based on what we learn from our experiences. Specific observations
More informationLOGICAL THINKING CHAPTER DEDUCTIVE THINKING: THE SYLLOGISM. If we reason it is not because we like to, but because we must.
ISBN: 0536299072 CHAPTER 9 LOGICAL THINKING If we reason it is not because we like to, but because we must. WILL DURANT, THE MANSIONS OF PHILOSOPHY Thinking logically and identifying reasoning fallacies
More informationThe Roman empire ended, the Mongol empire ended, the Persian empire ended, the British empire ended, all empires end, and none lasts forever.
BASIC ARGUMENTATION Alfred Snider, University of Vermont World Schools Debate Academy, Slovenia, 2015 Induction, deduction, causation, fallacies INDUCTION Definition: studying a sufficient number of analogous
More informationWhat would count as Ibn Sīnā (11th century Persia) having first order logic?
1 2 What would count as Ibn Sīnā (11th century Persia) having first order logic? Wilfrid Hodges Herons Brook, Sticklepath, Okehampton March 2012 http://wilfridhodges.co.uk Ibn Sina, 980 1037 3 4 Ibn Sīnā
More informationHANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.)
1 HANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.) I. ARGUMENT RECOGNITION Important Concepts An argument is a unit of reasoning that attempts to prove that a certain idea is true by
More informationLOGIC LECTURE #3: DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION. Source: A Concise Introduction to Logic, 11 th Ed. (Patrick Hurley, 2012)
LOGIC LECTURE #3: DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION Source: A Concise Introduction to Logic, 11 th Ed. (Patrick Hurley, 2012) Deductive Vs. Inductive If the conclusion is claimed to follow with strict certainty
More informationPHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy
PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy Session 3 September 9 th, 2015 All About Arguments (Part II) 1 A common theme linking many fallacies is that they make unwarranted assumptions. An assumption is a claim
More informationVERITAS EVANGELICAL SEMINARY
VERITAS EVANGELICAL SEMINARY A research paper, discussing the terms and definitions of inductive and deductive logic, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the certificate in Christian Apologetics
More informationRichard L. W. Clarke, Notes REASONING
1 REASONING Reasoning is, broadly speaking, the cognitive process of establishing reasons to justify beliefs, conclusions, actions or feelings. It also refers, more specifically, to the act or process
More informationThere are two common forms of deductively valid conditional argument: modus ponens and modus tollens.
INTRODUCTION TO LOGICAL THINKING Lecture 6: Two types of argument and their role in science: Deduction and induction 1. Deductive arguments Arguments that claim to provide logically conclusive grounds
More information6.5 Exposition of the Fifteen Valid Forms of the Categorical Syllogism
M06_COPI1396_13_SE_C06.QXD 10/16/07 9:17 PM Page 255 6.5 Exposition of the Fifteen Valid Forms of the Categorical Syllogism 255 7. All supporters of popular government are democrats, so all supporters
More informationPastorteacher Don Hargrove Faith Bible Church September 8, 2011
Pastorteacher Don Hargrove Faith Bible Church http://www.fbcweb.org/doctrines.html September 8, 2011 Building Mental Muscle & Growing the Mind through Logic Exercises: Lesson 4a The Three Acts of the
More informationHANDBOOK. IV. Argument Construction Determine the Ultimate Conclusion Construct the Chain of Reasoning Communicate the Argument 13
1 HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Argument Recognition 2 II. Argument Analysis 3 1. Identify Important Ideas 3 2. Identify Argumentative Role of These Ideas 4 3. Identify Inferences 5 4. Reconstruct the
More informationPhilosophical Arguments
Philosophical Arguments An introduction to logic and philosophical reasoning. Nathan D. Smith, PhD. Houston Community College Nathan D. Smith. Some rights reserved You are free to copy this book, to distribute
More informationSemantic Foundations for Deductive Methods
Semantic Foundations for Deductive Methods delineating the scope of deductive reason Roger Bishop Jones Abstract. The scope of deductive reason is considered. First a connection is discussed between the
More informationSelections from Aristotle s Prior Analytics 41a21 41b5
Lesson Seventeen The Conditional Syllogism Selections from Aristotle s Prior Analytics 41a21 41b5 It is clear then that the ostensive syllogisms are effected by means of the aforesaid figures; these considerations
More informationThe Problem of Major Premise in Buddhist Logic
The Problem of Major Premise in Buddhist Logic TANG Mingjun The Institute of Philosophy Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences Shanghai, P.R. China Abstract: This paper is a preliminary inquiry into the main
More informationPRACTICE EXAM The state of Israel was in a state of mourning today because of the assassination of Yztzak Rabin.
PRACTICE EXAM 1 I. Decide which of the following are arguments. For those that are, identify the premises and conclusions in them by CIRCLING them and labeling them with a P for the premises or a C for
More informationFallacies are deceptive errors of thinking.
Fallacies are deceptive errors of thinking. A good argument should: 1. be deductively valid (or inductively strong) and have all true premises; 2. have its validity and truthofpremises be as evident
More information6: DEDUCTIVE LOGIC. Chapter 17: Deductive validity and invalidity Ben Bayer Drafted April 25, 2010 Revised August 23, 2010
6: DEDUCTIVE LOGIC Chapter 17: Deductive validity and invalidity Ben Bayer Drafted April 25, 2010 Revised August 23, 2010 Deduction vs. induction reviewed In chapter 14, we spent a fair amount of time
More informationPlease visit our website for other great titles:
First printing: July 2010 Copyright 2010 by Jason Lisle. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission of the publisher, except
More informationTutorial A03: Patterns of Valid Arguments By: Jonathan Chan
A03.1 Introduction Tutorial A03: Patterns of Valid Arguments By: With valid arguments, it is impossible to have a false conclusion if the premises are all true. Obviously valid arguments play a very important
More informationLogic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. Questions
Questions I. Terms, Etc. 1. What is a Term? Explain and illustrate the chief divisions of Terms. What is meant by the Connotation of a Term? Illustrate. [S] 2. The connotation and denotation of terms vary
More informationSome Templates for Beginners: Template Option 1 I am analyzing A in order to argue B. An important element of B is C. C is significant because.
Common Topics for Literary and Cultural Analysis: What kinds of topics are good ones? The best topics are ones that originate out of your own reading of a work of literature. Here are some common approaches
More informationVarsity LD: It s All About Clash. 1:15 pm 2:30 pm TUESDAY, June 26
Varsity LD: It s All About Clash. 1:15 pm 2:30 pm TUESDAY, June 26 Session will discuss on how to refute arguments more effectively. Tim Cook Salado High School Tim.cook@saladoisd.org Attention All Attendees:
More informationLOGIC ANTHONY KAPOLKA FYF 1019/3/2010
LOGIC ANTHONY KAPOLKA FYF 1019/3/2010 LIBERALLY EDUCATED PEOPLE......RESPECT RIGOR NOT SO MUCH FOR ITS OWN SAKE BUT AS A WAY OF SEEKING TRUTH. LOGIC PUZZLE COOPER IS MURDERED. 3 SUSPECTS: SMITH, JONES,
More informationPart 2 Module 4: Categorical Syllogisms
Part 2 Module 4: Categorical Syllogisms Consider Argument 1 and Argument 2, and select the option that correctly identifies the valid argument(s), if any. Argument 1 All bears are omnivores. All omnivores
More informationRecall. Validity: If the premises are true the conclusion must be true. Soundness. Valid; and. Premises are true
Recall Validity: If the premises are true the conclusion must be true Soundness Valid; and Premises are true Validity In order to determine if an argument is valid, we must evaluate all of the sets of
More informationArgument and Persuasion. Stating Opinions and Proposals
Argument and Persuasion Stating Opinions and Proposals The Method It all starts with an opinion  something that people can agree or disagree with. The Method Move to action Speak your mind Convince someone
More informationCategorical Logic Handout Logic: Spring Sound: Any valid argument with true premises.
Categorical Logic Handout Logic: Spring 2017 Deductive argument: An argument whose premises are claimed to provide conclusive grounds for the truth of its conclusion. Validity: A characteristic of any
More informationPhil 3304 Introduction to Logic Dr. David Naugle. Identifying Arguments i
Phil 3304 Introduction to Logic Dr. David Naugle Identifying Arguments Dallas Baptist University Introduction Identifying Arguments i Any kid who has played with tinker toys and Lincoln logs knows that
More informationChapter 9 Sentential Proofs
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University Chapter 9 Sentential roofs 9.1 Introduction So far we have introduced three ways of assessing the validity of truthfunctional arguments.
More informationII Plenary discussion of Expertise and the Global Warming debate.
Thinking Straight Critical Reasoning WS 91 May 27, 2008 I. A. (Individually ) review and mark the answers for the assignment given on the last pages: (two points each for reconstruction and evaluation,
More informationReading Comprehension Fallacies in Reading
Reading Comprehension Fallacies in Reading Developed by Jamie A. Hughes, South Campus Learning Center, Communications Lab 042505 Permission to copy and use is granted to all FCCJ staff provided this
More informationPLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ
PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ Critical Thinking: Quiz 4 Chapter Three: Argument Evaluation Section I. Indicate whether the following claims (110) are either true (A) or false (B). 1. If an arguer precedes
More informationIllustrating Deduction. A Didactic Sequence for Secondary School
Illustrating Deduction. A Didactic Sequence for Secondary School Francisco Saurí Universitat de València. Dpt. de Lògica i Filosofia de la Ciència Cuerpo de Profesores de Secundaria. IES Vilamarxant (España)
More informationDeccan Education Society s FERGUSSON COLLEGE, PUNE (AUTONOMOUS) SYLLABUS UNDER AUTONOMY FIRST YEAR B.A. LOGIC SEMESTER I
Deccan Education Society s FERGUSSON COLLEGE, PUNE (AUTONOMOUS) SYLLABUS UNDER AUTONOMY FIRST YEAR B.A. LOGIC SEMESTER I Academic Year 20162017 Department: PHILOSOPHY Deccan Education Society s FERGUSSON
More informationGalen A. Foresman, Peter S. Fosl, and Jamie Carlin Watson CRITICAL THINKING
The Galen A. Foresman, Peter S. Fosl, and Jamie Carlin Watson CRITICAL THINKING THE CRITICAL THINKING TOOLKIT GALEN A. FORESMAN, PETER S. FOSL, AND JAMIE C. WATSON THE CRITICAL THINKING TOOLKIT This
More informationReasoning, Part I. Lecture 1, MATH 210G.03, Spring 2016
Lecture 1, MATH 210G.03, Spring 2016 Reasoning, Part I Reason is the capacity human beings have to make sense of things, to establish and verify facts, and to change or justify practices, institutions,
More informationLogical Fallacies RHETORICAL APPEALS
Logical Fallacies RHETORICAL APPEALS Rhetorical Appeals Ethos Appeals to credibility Pathos Appeals to emotion Logos Appeals to logic Structure of an Analysis/Argument Arguments operate under logic Your
More informationAppendix: The Logic Behind the Inferential Test
Appendix: The Logic Behind the Inferential Test In the Introduction, I stated that the basic underlying problem with forensic doctors is so easy to understand that even a twelveyearold could understand
More information