Study Guides. Chapter 1  Basic Training


 Holly Wilkins
 1 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 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) in support of one of the other propositions in the group that is receiving support. Conclusion: A proposition that is the part of an argument that is being supported by the premises. Deductive Argument: An argument whose premises are claimed to guarantee the truth of its conclusion. Deductive arguments can be either valid or invalid and either sound or unsound. Inductive Argument: An argument whose premises are claimed to increase the likelihood that its conclusion is true. Inductive arguments can be weak or strong. Logic: The basic principles and techniques that are used in distinguishing correct (good) reasoning from incorrect (bad) reasoning. Premise: A proposition that is part of an argument and is used to offer support for the conclusion. Proposition: An assertion that is either true or false. (Synonymous with Statement. ) Sentence: A unit of connected speech or writing that can have various uses, including that of asserting propositions. Sound Argument: A valid deductive argument all of whose premises are true. Valid Argument: A deductive argument whose conclusion would have to be true if its premises were true. 1
2 Chapter 2  Recognizing and Analyzing Arguments Language Uses Expressive: An expressive use of language is one in which the speaker reveals feeling, attitudes, and such, but does not assert any matter of fact. Directive: A directive use of language is one in which the speaker commands or encourages listeners to perform some action. Informative: An informative use of language is one in which the speaker states a matter of fact. Ritual: A ritual use of language is one in which words are spoken as part of a formal or informal ceremony. Performative: A performative use of language is one in which the speaker accomplishes something by the speaking. Kinds of Arguments Deduction: A deduction is an argument in which the premises are intended to guarantee the truth of the conclusion. Induction: An induction is an argument whose premises are intended to establish that the conclusion is likely true. Sorites: A chain of arguments in which the conclusions of earlier arguments serve as the premises of later arguments. Enthymeme: An argument with a missing premise or conclusion. Groups of propositions often mistaken for arguments Descriptions: A description consists of one or more propositions that is (are) intended merely to convey information about something. Explanations: An explanation is intended to account for why something is true that is already known to be true. An explanation is distinguished from an argument in this respect since an argument is intended to establish that something that is not known to be true is in fact true. Good Arguments Hypothetical Syllogism: If A implies B and if B implies C, then A must imply C. Modus Ponens: If A implies B and A is true, then B must be true. Modus Tollens: If A implies B and B is false, then A must be false. Disjunctive Syllogism: If either A or B is true and A is false, then B must be true; or if either A or B is true and B is false, then A must be true. Bad Arguments The Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent: If A implies B, and B is true, it does not follow that A must be true. The Fallacy of Denying the Antecedent: If A implies B and A is false, it does not follow that B must be false. 2
3 Chapter 3 Disputes and Definitions Disputes I: Attitudes and Beliefs Attitude: A difference in attitude is one in which the parties do not disagree about matters of fact, but differ in their feelings or attitudes. Belief: A disagreement in belief in one in which one person takes something to be true and the other denies it. Both: Some disputes involve both attitudes and beliefs. Neither: Some apparent disputes are neither actual disagreements nor actual differences. Disputes II: Genuine and Verbal Genuine: Dispute remains even when terms are clearly defined. Verbal: Dispute is a function of terms that are not clearly defined and dissolves when terms are clarified. NonLexical Definitions Emotive: The assignment of meaning to a term that is designed to arouse emotions, pro or con. Precising: The assignment of meaning to a term designed to clarify its application and to eliminate vagueness. Stipulative: The assignment of a meaning to a term by mutual agreement. Such definitions are neither true nor false. Theoretical: The assignment of meaning to a term on the basis of a theoretical framework. Lexical Definitions Definitions with synonyms: The assignment of meaning to a term by transferring to it the meaning of another term presumed to be more readily known and roughly equivalent to it. Operations definitions: The assignment of meaning to a term on the basis of some observational effect that the term is supposed to produce. Genus/Species: The assignment of meaning to a general term on the basis of its affiliation with a general category and on the basis of its specific difference from other members of that category. Lexical Definition Defects Accidental: A definition is accidental if it fails to state the essential characteristics of the term being defined. Circular: A definition is circular if the term being defined is used in the definition itself. Emotive: An emotive definition is one which attempts to arouse emotions rather than clarify the concept. Figurative: A figurative definition is one which uses a metaphor or image rather than making an attempt to state the essential characteristics of the concept being defined. Negative: A negative definition is one which says what a term does not mean rather than what it does mean. Obscure: An obscure definition is one which uses language even less well known than the term being defined. Too Broad: A definition is too broad if it includes more than actually falls within the domain of the term being defined. Too Narrow: A definition is too narrow if it excludes some things that are included within the domain of the term being defined. Too Broad and Too Narrow: A definition can be both too exclusive and too inclusive. 3
4 Chapter 4  Identifying Fallacies 1. Ignorance: Committed when an attempt is made to justify a conclusion on the basis of a lack of evidence. 2. Pity: Committed when an attempt is made to justify a conclusion on the basis of pity. 3. Desire: Committed when an attempt is made to justify a conclusion on the basis of a desire that it is true. 4. Authority: Committed when an attempt is made to justify a conclusion by an inappropriate appeal to authority. 5. Begging the Question: Committed when the conclusion is assumed as a premise 6. CharacterAbusive: Discrediting an argument on the basis of a person s questionable character. 7. CharacterCircumstantial: Discrediting an argument on the basis of a person s obvious bias. 8. Complex Question: Assumes an answer to an unasked question embedded in the question asked. 9. False Cause: Assumes that one event is the cause of another when is it actually not the cause. 10. Popularity: An appeal to popular opinion as a supporting reason. 11. Force: An appeal to force as a supporting reason. 12. Hasty Generalization: (Converse Accident) Generalization on the basis of exceptions 13. Accident: Use of a general rule that does not fit an exceptional case. 14. Irrelevant Conclusion: Jumping to conclusions on the basis of unwarranted assumptions. 15. Equivocation: Invalid conclusion based on an ambiguous use of a term. 16. Amphiboly: Invalid conclusion based on a faulty grammatical construction. 17. Accent: Invalid conclusion based on misleading emphasis or deemphasis of words or phrases. 18. Composition: An inference that a whole or collection has the same properties its parts or members have 19. Division: An inference that the parts of a whole or members of a collection have the same properties as the whole. 4
5 Chapter 5  Categorical Propositions StandardForm Categorical Propositions: E Proposition: No S is P Universal Quantity; Negative Quality A Proposition: All S is P Universal Quantity; Affirmative Quality I Proposition: Some S is P Particular Quantity; Affirmative Quality O Proposition: Some S is not P Particular Quantity; Negative Quality Distribution A: Sterm distributed; Pterm undistributed (DU) E: both terms distributed (DD) I: both terms undistributed (UU) O: Sterm undistributed; Pterm distributed (UD) Immediate Inferences A: All S is P: Some P are S (valid by limit) E: No S is P: No P are S (valid) I: Some S is P: Some P are S (valid) O: Some S is not P (not valid) Obversion: A: All S is P: No S are nonp (valid) E: No S is P: All S are nonp (valid) I: Some S is P: Some S are not nonp (valid) O: Some S is not P: Some S are nonp (valid) Contraposition: A: All S is P: All nonp are nons (valid) E: No S is P: Some nonp are not non S (valid by limit) I: Some S is P: (not valid) O: Some S is not P: Some nonp are not nons (valid) 5
6 Chapter 6  Categorical Arguments Categorical Fallacies: 1. Illicit Terms: A valid standardform categorical syllogism must contain exactly, and only, three class terms. 2. Illicit Minor: In a valid standardform categorical syllogism, if the minor term is distributed in the conclusion, it must be distributed in the minor premise. 3. Illicit Major: In a valid standardform categorical syllogism, if the major term is distributed in the conclusion, it must be distributed in the major premise. 4. Illicit Middle: In a valid standardform categorical syllogism, the middle term must be distributed in at least one premise. 5. Illicit Quality: In a valid standardform categorical syllogism, the conclusion must be negative if there is a negative premise. 6. The Existential Fallacy: In a valid standardform categorical syllogism, the conclusion cannot be particular if both premises are universal. 7. Two Negatives: A valid standardform categorical syllogism can't have two negative premises. Venn Diagrams Test for Validity Step One: Draw three interlocking circles and label each one with an uppercase letter designating one of the classes in the argument being tested. Step Two: Diagram the major and the minor premises but never diagram the conclusion. It does not matter which premise you diagram first, unless one of the premises is a particular proposition and the other one is a universal proposition. In this case, always diagram the universal proposition first. Step Three: Examine the diagram to see if it contains a diagram of the conclusion of the syllogism you are testing. If it does, then the argument is valid; if it doesn't, the argument is invalid. Valid Forms: Figure 1 AAA EAE AII EIO; Figure 2 EAE AEE EIO AOO Figure 3 IAI AII OAO EIO Figure 4 AEE IAI EIO Traditionally Valid Forms Figure 1: AAI; EAO Figure 2: AEO; EAO Figure 3: AAI; EAO Figure 4: AEO; EAO; AAI 6
7 Chapter 7  Sentential Propositions Kinds of Sentential Propositions: The Conjunction: p and q. The conjunction is symbolized as p q. The parts of the conjunction are called conjuncts. The conjunction is true if and only if both of its conjuncts are true. The Disjunction: either p or q. The disjunction is symbolized as p v q. The parts of the disjunction are called disjuncts. The disjunction is true if and only if either or both of its disjuncts is (are) true. The Negation: not p. The negation is symbolized as ~ p. The negation is true if and only if what it negates is false and false if and only if what it negates is true. The Conditional: if p then q. The conditional is symbolized as p q. It has two parts: the if part is the antecedent and the then part is the consequent. The conditional is false only if the antecedent is true and the consequent is false. The Biconditional: p if and only if q. The biconditional is symbolized as p q. The biconditional is true if and only if p and q have the same truthvalue and false if and only if p and q have different truthvalues. Chapter 8  Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms Tautology: A proposition that is true under every possible interpretation. Contradiction: A proposition that is false under every possible interpretation. Contingent Proposition: A proposition that is true under some interpretations and false under others. Rules of Inference (So far) 1. Modus Ponens (MP) p q; p; Therefore q 2. Modus Tollens (MT) p q; q; Therefore p 3. Hypothetical Syllogism (HS) p q; q r; Therefore p r 4. Disjunctive Syllogism (DS (p v q; q, Therefore p ( p v q; p; Therefore, q 7
8 Chapter 9 Sentential Proofs Rules of Inference 1. Modus Ponens (MP) p q; p; Therefore q 2. Modus Tollens (MT) p q; q; Therefore p 3. Hypothetical Syllogism (HS) p q; q r; Therefore p r 4. Constructive Dilemma (CD) (p q) (r s); p v r; Therefore q v s 5. Disjunctive Syllogism (DS (p v q; q, Therefore p ( p v q; p; Therefore, q) 6. Simplification (Simp) p q Therefore p (p q Therefore q) 7. Addition (Add) p Therefore p v q 8. Conjunction (Conj) p; q Therefore p q 9. Absorption (Abs) p q, Therefore p (p q) Standard Logical Equivalences 1. DeMorgan's (DM) (p q) ( p v q); (p v q) ( p q) 2. Commutation (Comm) (p q) (q p); (p v q) (q v p) 3. Association (Assn) [p v (q v r)] [(p v q) v r]; [p (q r)] [(p q) r] 4. Distribution (Dist) [p (q v r)] [(p q) v (p r)]; [p v (q r)] [(p v q) (p v r)] 5. Double Negation (DN) p p 6. Transposition (Trans) (p q) ( q p) 7. Material Implication (Imp) (p q) ( p v q) 8. Exportation (Exp) [(p q) r] [p (q r)] 9. Material Equivalence (EQ) (p q) [(p q) (q p)]; [(p q) v ( p q)] 10. Tautology (Taut) p (p v p); p (p p) Assumption Rules: You may assume any proposition, at any time, in any deduction, as long as the assumption is discharged according to the rules IP or CP before concluding the deduction. Assumed Premise (AP): The abbreviation for the justification when the Assumption Rule is employed Conditional Proof (CP): Allows you to infer a conditional proposition from an assumed premise. The conditional proposition inferred must have the assumed premise as its antecedent and the immediately preceding line as its consequent. Step I: Assume a premise (AP). Step II: Make deductions from this premise. Step III: Discharge the Assumed Premise with a conditional proposition (AP q) Indirect Proof (IP): Allows you to infer the negation of an assumed premise only if a contradiction is derived from the assumed premise. Step I: Assume a premise (AP). Step II: Derive a contradiction (p ~p). Step III: Discharge the Assumed Premise with a negation of the Assumed Premise (~AP) 8
9 Chapter 10  Predicate Logic Quantification Rules of Inference 1. Universal Instantiation (UI) (x)(gx. Ga) (x)gx Gu ( a is an individual constant and u is a free variable) 2. Universal Generalization (UG) Gu (x)gx ( u is a free variable. Note this rule does not allow the inference: Ga (x) Gx, where a is an individual constant) 3. Existential Generalization (EG) Ga ( x)gx Gu ( x)gx a is an individual constant and u is a free variable 4. Existential Instantiation (EI) ( x)gx Ga a is an individual constant that has not occurred previously in the deduction; note that it is not a valid application of EI to infer ( x)gx Gu, where u is a free variable Quantifier Negation (QN) ~( x)~gx (x)gx ~(x)~gx ( x)gx ~( x)gx (x)~gx ~(x)gx ( x)~gx Translating A, E, I, O Categorical Propositions into Predicate Logic A Proposition: All S are P: (x) (Sx Px) E Proposition: No S are P: (x)(sx ~Px) I Proposition: Some S are P: ( x)(sx Px) O Proposition: Some S are not P: ( x)(sx ~Px) 9
Chapter 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 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: 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 information9 Methods of Deduction
M09_COPI1396_13_SE_C09.QXD 10/19/07 3:46 AM Page 372 9 Methods of Deduction 9.1 Formal Proof of Validity 9.2 The Elementary Valid Argument Forms 9.3 Formal Proofs of Validity Exhibited 9.4 Constructing
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 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 informationAnnouncements. CS243: Discrete Structures. First Order Logic, Rules of Inference. Review of Last Lecture. Translating English into FirstOrder Logic
Announcements CS243: Discrete Structures First Order Logic, Rules of Inference Işıl Dillig Homework 1 is due now Homework 2 is handed out today Homework 2 is due next Tuesday Işıl Dillig, CS243: Discrete
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 informationb) The meaning of "child" would need to be taken in the sense of age, as most people would find the idea of a young child going to jail as wrong.
Explanation for Question 1 in Quiz 8 by Norva Lo  Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 9:39 AM The following is the solution for Question 1 in Quiz 8: (a) Which term in the argument is being equivocated. (b) What
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 informationUnit 4. Reason as a way of knowing. Tuesday, March 4, 14
Unit 4 Reason as a way of knowing 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,
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 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 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 informationIntroduction Symbolic Logic
An Introduction to Symbolic Logic Copyright 2006 by Terence Parsons all rights reserved CONTENTS Chapter One Sentential Logic with 'if' and 'not' 1 SYMBOLIC NOTATION 2 MEANINGS OF THE SYMBOLIC NOTATION
More informationChapter 3 Disputes and Definitions
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University Chapter 3 Disputes and Definitions 3.1 Disputes I: Attitudes and Beliefs At this point we must deal with one more consequence that the recognition
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 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 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 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 informationAn Introduction to. Formal Logic. Second edition. Peter Smith, February 27, 2019
An Introduction to Formal Logic Second edition Peter Smith February 27, 2019 Peter Smith 2018. Not for reposting or recirculation. Comments and corrections please to ps218 at cam dot ac dot uk 1 What
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 informationSemantic Entailment and Natural Deduction
Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction Alice Gao Lecture 6, September 26, 2017 Entailment 1/55 Learning goals Semantic entailment Define semantic entailment. Explain subtleties of semantic entailment.
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 informationAnnouncements. CS311H: Discrete Mathematics. First Order Logic, Rules of Inference. Satisfiability, Validity in FOL. Example.
Announcements CS311H: Discrete Mathematics First Order Logic, Rules of Inference Instructor: Işıl Dillig Homework 1 is due now! Homework 2 is handed out today Homework 2 is due next Wednesday Instructor:
More informationExposition of Symbolic Logic with KalishMontague derivations
An Exposition of Symbolic Logic with KalishMontague derivations Copyright 200613 by Terence Parsons all rights reserved Aug 2013 Preface The system of logic used here is essentially that of Kalish &
More informationArtificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Artificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems Prof. Deepak Khemani Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Module 02 Lecture  03 So in the last
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 informationComplications for Categorical Syllogisms. PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning February 27, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University
Complications for Categorical Syllogisms PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning February 27, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University Overall Plan First, I will present some problematic propositions and
More informationThe way we convince people is generally to refer to sufficiently many things that they already know are correct.
Theorem A Theorem is a valid deduction. One of the key activities in higher mathematics is identifying whether or not a deduction is actually a theorem and then trying to convince other people that you
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 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 information10.3 Universal and Existential Quantifiers
M10_COPI1396_13_SE_C10.QXD 10/22/07 8:42 AM Page 441 10.3 Universal and Existential Quantifiers 441 and Wx, and so on. We call these propositional functions simple predicates, to distinguish them from
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 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 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 informationWhat is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 PanHellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece
What is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 PanHellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece Outline of this Talk 1. What is the nature of logic? Some history
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 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 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 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 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 information7. Some recent rulings of the Supreme Court were politically motivated decisions that flouted the entire history of U.S. legal practice.
M05_COPI1396_13_SE_C05.QXD 10/12/07 9:00 PM Page 193 5.5 The Traditional Square of Opposition 193 EXERCISES Name the quality and quantity of each of the following propositions, and state whether their
More informationWhat are TruthTables and What Are They For?
PY114: Work Obscenely Hard Week 9 (Meeting 7) 30 November, 2010 What are TruthTables and What Are They For? 0. Business Matters: The last marked homework of term will be due on Monday, 6 December, at
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 informationA BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS 0. Logic, Probability, and Formal Structure Logic is often divided into two distinct areas, inductive logic and deductive logic. Inductive logic is concerned
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 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 informationEssential Logic Ronald C. Pine
Essential Logic Ronald C. Pine Chapter 11: Other Logical Tools Syllogisms and Quantification Introduction A persistent theme of this book has been the interpretation of logic as a set of practical tools.
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 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 informationDoes Deduction really rest on a more secure epistemological footing than Induction?
Does Deduction really rest on a more secure epistemological footing than Induction? We argue that, if deduction is taken to at least include classical logic (CL, henceforth), justifying CL  and thus deduction
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 informationExercise Sets. KS Philosophical Logic: Modality, Conditionals Vagueness. Dirk Kindermann University of Graz July 2014
Exercise Sets KS Philosophical Logic: Modality, Conditionals Vagueness Dirk Kindermann University of Graz July 2014 1 Exercise Set 1 Propositional and Predicate Logic 1. Use Definition 1.1 (Handout I Propositional
More informationA Solution to the Gettier Problem Keota Fields. the three traditional conditions for knowledge, have been discussed extensively in the
A Solution to the Gettier Problem Keota Fields Problem cases by Edmund Gettier 1 and others 2, intended to undermine the sufficiency of the three traditional conditions for knowledge, have been discussed
More informationIs the law of excluded middle a law of logic?
Is the law of excluded middle a law of logic? Introduction I will conclude that the intuitionist s attempt to rule out the law of excluded middle as a law of logic fails. They do so by appealing to harmony
More informationRussell: On Denoting
Russell: On Denoting DENOTING PHRASES Russell includes all kinds of quantified subject phrases ( a man, every man, some man etc.) but his main interest is in definite descriptions: the present King of
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 informationTransition to Quantified Predicate Logic
Transition to Quantified Predicate Logic Predicates You may remember (but of course you do!) during the first class period, I introduced the notion of validity with an argument much like (with the same
More information16. Universal derivation
16. Universal derivation 16.1 An example: the Meno In one of Plato s dialogues, the Meno, Socrates uses questions and prompts to direct a young slave boy to see that if we want to make a square that has
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 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. 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 informationILLOCUTIONARY ORIGINS OF FAMILIAR LOGICAL OPERATORS
ILLOCUTIONARY ORIGINS OF FAMILIAR LOGICAL OPERATORS 1. ACTS OF USING LANGUAGE Illocutionary logic is the logic of speech acts, or language acts. Systems of illocutionary logic have both an ontological,
More informationLecture 3 Arguments Jim Pryor What is an Argument? Jim Pryor Vocabulary Describing Arguments
Lecture 3 Arguments Jim Pryor What is an Argument? Jim Pryor Vocabulary Describing Arguments 1 Agenda 1. What is an Argument? 2. Evaluating Arguments 3. Validity 4. Soundness 5. Persuasive Arguments 6.
More informationAncient Philosophy Handout #1: Logic Overview
Ancient Philosophy Handout #1: Logic Overview I. Stoic Logic A. Proposition types Affirmative P P Negative not P ~P Conjunction P and Q P Q Hypothetical (or Conditional) if P, then Q Disjunction P or Q
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 informationCourses providing assessment data PHL 202. Semester/Year
1 Department/Program 20122016 Assessment Plan Department: Philosophy Directions: For each department/program student learning outcome, the department will provide an assessment plan, giving detailed information
More informationPitt State Pathway (Undergraduate Course Numbers through 699)
Please check only one: Pitt State Pathway (Undergraduate Course Numbers through 699) Course is currently a General Education course Course is listed in the current catalog, but is NOT a General Education
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 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 informationTWO VERSIONS OF HUME S LAW
DISCUSSION NOTE BY CAMPBELL BROWN JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE MAY 2015 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT CAMPBELL BROWN 2015 Two Versions of Hume s Law MORAL CONCLUSIONS CANNOT VALIDLY
More informationFACULTY OF ARTS B.A. Part II Examination,
FACULTY OF ARTS B.A. Part II Examination, 201516 8. PHILOSOPHY SCHEME Two Papers Min. pass marks 72 Max. Marks 200 Paper  I 3 hrs duration 100 Marks Paper  II 3 hrs duration 100 Marks PAPER  I: HISTORY
More informationScott Soames: Understanding Truth
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. LXV, No. 2, September 2002 Scott Soames: Understanding Truth MAlTHEW MCGRATH Texas A & M University Scott Soames has written a valuable book. It is unmatched
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 informationUC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016
Logical Consequence UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane 1 Intuitive characterizations of consequence Modal: It is necessary (or apriori) that, if the premises are true, the conclusion
More informationLogic and Argument Analysis: An Introduction to Formal Logic and Philosophic Method (REVISED)
Carnegie Mellon University Research Showcase @ CMU Department of Philosophy Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences 1985 Logic and Argument Analysis: An Introduction to Formal Logic and Philosophic
More informationhow to be an expressivist about truth
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California March 15, 2009 how to be an expressivist about truth In this paper I explore why one might hope to, and how to begin to, develop an expressivist account
More informationHOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT
What does it mean to provide an argument for a statement? To provide an argument for a statement is an activity we carry out both in our everyday lives and within the sciences. We provide arguments for
More informationA. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November
Lecture 9: Propositional Logic I Philosophy 130 1 & 3 November 2016 O Rourke & Gibson I. Administrative A. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November B. I am working on the group
More informationKRISHNA KANTA HANDIQUI STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY Patgaon, Ranigate, Guwahati SEMESTER: 1 PHILOSOPHY PAPER : 1 LOGIC: 1 BLOCK: 2
GPH S1 01 KRISHNA KANTA HANDIQUI STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY Patgaon, Ranigate, Guwahati781017 SEMESTER: 1 PHILOSOPHY PAPER : 1 LOGIC: 1 BLOCK: 2 CONTENTS UNIT 6 : Modern analysis of proposition UNIT 7 : Square
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 informationLogic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER VI CONDITIONS OF IMMEDIATE INFERENCE
CHAPTER VI CONDITIONS OF IMMEDIATE INFERENCE Section 1. The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means
More informationChapter 2 Analyzing Arguments
Logic: A Brief Introduction Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University Chapter 2 Analyzing Arguments 2.1 Introduction Now that we have gotten our "mental muscles" warmed up, let's see how well we can put our newly
More informationAcademic argument does not mean conflict or competition; an argument is a set of reasons which support, or lead to, a conclusion.
ACADEMIC SKILLS THINKING CRITICALLY In the everyday sense of the word, critical has negative connotations. But at University, Critical Thinking is a positive process of understanding different points of
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 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 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 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 informationThe distinction between truthfunctional and nontruthfunctional logical and linguistic
FORMAL CRITERIA OF NONTRUTHFUNCTIONALITY Dale Jacquette The Pennsylvania State University 1. TruthFunctional Meaning The distinction between truthfunctional and nontruthfunctional logical and linguistic
More informationLing 98a: The Meaning of Negation (Week 1)
Yimei Xiang yxiang@fas.harvard.edu 17 September 2013 1 What is negation? Negation in twovalued propositional logic Based on your understanding, select out the metaphors that best describe the meaning
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 information