The Birth of Logic in Ancient Greek.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "The Birth of Logic in Ancient Greek."

Transcription

1 Modulo CLIL Titolo del modulo: Autore: Massimo Mora Lingua: Inglese Materia: Filosofia The Birth of Logic in Ancient Greek. Contenuti: Aristotelian theory of logic, the difference between truth, falsehood and Validity, the perfect form of reasoning: the Syllogism. Classe: 3 linguistico Durata: 10 ore Prerequisiti: Eraclito, Parmenide, Diagrammi di Venn Obiettivi: comprendere la differenza tra falso, privo di senso e insensato. comprendere la differenza tra validità e verità saper applicare le regole del sillogismo e identificare i ragionamenti validi e quelli non validi saper fare sillogismi validi nelle diverse figure e modi con proposizioni vere e/o false. Modalità di lavoro: Lezione frontale Lettura schede preparate dall insegnante Esercizi alla lavagna e al banco Esercizi in gruppo Materiali: schede in lingua inglese prodotte dall insegnante 1 ; testi di riferimento: -A New Modern History of Western Phylosophy di A. Kenny -A Modern Introduction to Logic di Stebbing Verifica finale: Valutazione: Knowledge of topic (1-4) Ability to synthetize/analyze (1-3) Formal Accuracy (2-1) excellent good ok Could be better 1 Tutto il materiale in lingua inglese è stato prodotto dall insegnate, controllato dal collega di lingua inglese e consegnato agli studenti. 1

2 Originality (1) Lezioni Fase 1: (1 ora) Content: presentazione progetto CLIL in lingua italiana introduzione generale alle tematiche in lingua inglese Fase 2: (1 ora) Content: Introduction to the notion of syllogism materials: Attached A1 Whole class lesson final exercise Fase 3: (2 ore) content: The elements of the syllogism and the theory of distribution materials: Attached A2 whole class lesson and exercises at the blackboard with Venn diagrams Fase 4: (2 ore) Contents: Terms and figures Materials: A3 Whole class lesson and works in groups Fase 5: (2 ore) Contents: general and particular rules of the syllogism Materials: A4 Whole class lesson and exercices at the blackboard with flow diagram, tables Fase 6: (1 ora) Contents: final reflections on the difference between truth and validity Materials: A5 Modalità: whole class lesson and tables at the blackboard Fase 7: (1 ora) Final test Materials: A6 2

3 Allegati: A1. Logic and syllogism. The two terms are strongly related because syllogism is, etymologically, a Greek word that means to link together ideas, concepts in other words, reasoning. Logic is, by definition, the study of valid inferences or, to use Kenny s words, Logic is the discipline that sorts out good arguments from bad arguments. 2 We ll see the meaning of validity and the difference between valid and truth in the following lessons. We start with an example of syllogism 1 All soldiers are brave 2 All parachutists are soldiers 3 All parachutists are brave Aristotle defines the syllogism as follows: A syllogism is a discourse in which, certain specific things that have been supposed different from other things result of necessity because these things are so." From certain given things (1 and 2 that we call the premises), something different comes (the point 3, the conclusion) from necessity. This means that given 1 and 2 there are no other choices than 3. Only if the conclusion comes from necessity we can say that the syllogism is a valid one, otherwise we have bad arguments as in the following case: 1.All men are mortal 2.Socrates is mortal 3.Socrates is a man This is a clear example in which, given the premises, the conclusion doesn t follow from necessity because I could have a dog named Socrates that is mortal but not human. As we have seen, a syllogism is composed by three propositions and each of the premises has one term in common with the conclusion: the first two propositions are called premises, the third is the conclusion and there are some triads that work and others that don t. So the question is: What is that allows the realization of a syllogism? Is there a hidden link? Are there rules that govern this form of reasoning? Exercise: Analyze this argumentation, is this a syllogism? Motivate your choice. All priests are saints Some men are not priests Some men are not saints A2 2 A. Kenny A new History of Western Philosophy p.95 3

4 In the example of the soldiers, the propositions are universals and affirmatives (their logical structure is: All S are P), but there are also particular propositions, so called because they don t involve a class, or a category, in the whole, but they refer to at least one member of the class, as in the case of Students in the example Some students are clever. The logic form, in this case, is Some S are P where S means at least one 3. - Some S are P doesn t exclude All S are P, it just states that at least one S is P and that is enough. On the contrary: - All S are P includes that Some S are P. We can express this by saying that what is true for all is also true for some, but not necessarily what is true for some is true for all. Universal and particular propositions differ in quantity, but they also can differ in quality: 1.No musicians are sensitive 2.Some poets are not sensitive are universal (1) and particular (2), but whereas in the syllogisms above the propositions are affirmatives, these are negatives. We are now able to define four kinds of propositions using a criterion invented by logicians in the middle age. A: all S are P (universal and affirmative) E: No S are P (universal and negative) I: some S are P (particular and affirmative) O: some S are not P (particular and negative) 4 Exercise: each student must write 12 propositions in English, three for every kind (15 minutes). They can consul the Dictionary and at the end, a construction of a list will follow. Doctrine of distribution. In order to understand how a syllogism works, we need to analyze and understand what is called the doctrine of distribution. We shall explain what this term means using a slightly modified version of Venn diagrams Definition: a term is distributed when it refers to all the members of the class for which it stands. The term dog stands for the class of all the dogs, man stands for the class of all men When in a proposition a term refers to the whole class, we say that it is distributed. Let s analyze what happens in our four kinds of propositions: A: All priests (P) are saints (S) This clearly means that all what is included in P is S, every single priest is saint, but not all saints are priests; for example, x. We can say that P is distributed because it refers to all the members of the class for which it stands while S is not. E: No priests are Saints. Here we are referring to all priests and we say that they are not saints, but at the same time we are saying that no saints are priests. Both the terms are distributed. I: some priests are saints. We are talking about some S that are P and some P that are S, so neither S nor P are distributed. 3 For simplicity I don t distinguish between particular and individual propositions so Some S are P and X is P are equivalent. 4 A-I are affirmative from the vowels of the Latin word Adfirmo and E-O are negative form the vowels of Nego. 4

5 O: some P are not S. Here S is clearly not distributed because we are talking about some S, but P is distributer because we say that there is nothing in P that is also an S. If we suppose that the saints in question are X, Y and W, then no priests are X or Y or W. The general rule for the distribution is the following: In universal propositions the subject is always distributed, in negative propositions the predicate is always distributed A3. Coming back to the syllogism and his structure, we have said that a syllogism is made by three propositions and now we must analyze the structure of the proposition in order to understand how a syllogism works. Propositions express relations between two terms: the subject and the predicate. All Greeks are philosophers All Spartan are Greeks All Spartan are philosophers As we can see, we have got three terms that play in this syllogism: Greeks, philosophers and Spartan, every term occurs twice, but only one occurs in both premisses, Greeks. This in called by Aristotle, the middle term that we indicate with M. So, by definition, the Middle term is the only term that occurs in both premisses. The term that occurs as predicate in the conclusion is called Major term, we indicate it with P and the premise in which it occurs is called first, or major premise. The term that occurs as subject in the conclusion is called Minor term and is indicated with S and the premise in which it occurs is called second or minor premise. If we substitute the terms with the letters, what we obtain is a scheme as follows All M are P All S are M All S are P This is the first figure of the syllogism, the perfect one, that in which the middle term occurs as subject in the first premise and as predicate in the second. Syllogisms may be made using the four kinds of propositions and, also, varying the occurrences as: -subject in both premisses -predicate in both premisses -predicate in the major premise and subject in the minor. On this base, Aristotle identifies 4 figures of syllogism: 1.MP 2. PM 3. MP 4. PM SM SM MS MS SP SP SP SP It s worthy to notice, in order to avoid mistakes and confusion, that S means the subject in the conclusion and not just subject because it occurs as predicate in minor propositions in the third and fourth figure. Similarly, P is the predicate of the conclusion and occurs as subject in the second and fourth figure. Exercise: The students try to make up four syllogisms, one for every figure. 5

6 1. All Cats are Black All Siamese are cats Sll Siamese are Black 2. All Mice are Gray No Dolphins are Grey No Dolphins are Mice 3. No Humans are Immortal Some Gods are Immortal Some Gods are not Human 4. Nessun onesto è ricco Qualche ricco è generoso Qualche generoso non è onesto. Four figures and four propositions that can be mixed together for the production of 256 possible syllogisms. The table below shows the sixteen combinations for the A-proposition in the first figure. 4 3 =64, combinations of the first figure 64x4=256, combinations of the four figures A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A Premessa A A A A E E E E I I I I O O O O Premessa A E I O A E I O A E I O A E I O Conclusione Exercise: find the 16 combinations for the E-proposition In the next paragraph We ll see how the rules that govern a syllogism cut off a lot of combinations leaving only 19 valid forms A4. Rules 5 : there are two kinds of rules: the general ones that do apply to every syllogism and the particulars that don t. General rules: A syllogism must be composed by three propositions and three terms The Middle Term must be distributed in at least one premise A term distributed in the conclusion must be distributed in the premise in which it occurs From two negative propositions no conclusion is allowed From two particular propositions no conclusion is allowed If one premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative If one premise is particular, le conclusion must be particular Rules of the first figure: The Minor premise must be affirmative because if it were negative, the conclusion should be negative and the first premise positive, but in this case P would be distributed in the conclusion and not in the premise. 5 We won t consider, neither the fourth figure, nor the syllogisms with universal premises and particular conclusion because it is certainly true that if all Greeks are mortal, also some Greeks are mortal, but this is a weak conclusion that can be drawn only using a general truth: What is true for all is true for some. This could be troublesome. 6

7 The major premise must be Universal in order to grant the distribution of the middle term. Exercise: find out the combinations at the blackboard. A A E E A I A I A I E O And the corresponding syllogisms are called BARBARA, DARII, CELARENT, FERIO Rules of the second figure One premise must be negative, for the distribution of the middle term The major premise must be universal, for the distribution of P Exercise: to find out the combinations at the blackboard E E A A A I E O E O E O CESARE, FESTINO CAMESTRES, BAROCO Rules of the third figure: The minor premise must be affirmative (see the first figure) The conclusion must be particular, because if it were universal, S would be distributed in the conclusion but not in the minor premise. Exercise: to find out the combinations at the blackboard E I O I A A O I O ferison disamis bocardo A5. Now we are able to understand the difference between truth and validity: truth is a relation between a proposition and the world: if things are as it s stated, the proposition is true, otherwise it s false. Validity is a property that relates to a set of propositions linked together and the way in which they are linked may be valid or not. First comes the proposition that expresses a thought, and then comes the truth. Parmenides talked of the Truth s way, that in which being and thought are the same and we have seen many logical and metaphysical implications. Someone said that Parmenides is the father of the logic because we can directly derive, from his principle, the famous laws of logic A=A (Identity: something is equal only to itself) -(A e -A) (Non-contradiction: it s not possible for something to be and not to be at the same time) A o A (Excluded Middle: something is or is not; a proposition is true or false, there isn t another way) With the Non-contradiction principle, Zeno demonstrated, by absurd, that nothing moves nor changes, but a demonstration is a process that involves propositions and here comes Aristotle with the four kinds of proposition and a famous definition of truth To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true 7

8 Propositions, whether affirmatives or not, particular or not, may be true or false and we say that a deduction can be valid despite the truth or falsehood of the propositions. We can have the following combinations: First premise V V V V F F F F Second premise V V F F V V F F Conclusion V F V F V F V 6 F Working in group: Students will form eight groups and every group will take one of the eight combinations with the aim to write down three pleasing syllogisms. The theory of validity may have metaphysical implications because truth is stronger (or wicker, it depends from the point of view) than falsity: we can build a valid syllogism with false premises and a true conclusion but we can t have true premises and a false conclusion: there is no way from truth to falsity. (Socrate, Agostino Spinoza: if you know the truth, you can t act wrongly; if you have seen the light; you cannot commit a sin ) As we will see, in propositional logic, the conditional PQ is false only when is the case that P is true and Q is false, and I think that this is the only reason that can justify such a rule. P Q PQ V V V A6. 1 Which is the definition of syllogism? 2 What is a figure and how many figures did Aristotle pinpoint? 3 What does the theory of distribution say and which is the general rule for the four kinds of propositions? 4 Why, in a syllogism of second figure, one premise must be negative? 6 All sailors are philosophers Socrates is a sailor Socrates is a philosopher 8

9 5 Which is the difference between Truth and Validity? 6 Make a syllogism with false premises and a true conclusion 7 Make a syllogism in CESARE and in FERIO 9

SYLLOGISTIC LOGIC CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS

SYLLOGISTIC 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 information

MCQ IN TRADITIONAL LOGIC. 1. Logic is the science of A) Thought. B) Beauty. C) Mind. D) Goodness

MCQ 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 information

In this section you will learn three basic aspects of logic. When you are done, you will understand the following:

In this section you will learn three basic aspects of logic. When you are done, you will understand the following: Basic Principles of Deductive Logic Part One: In this section you will learn three basic aspects of logic. When you are done, you will understand the following: Mental Act Simple Apprehension Judgment

More information

Syllogisms in Aristotle and Boethius

Syllogisms in Aristotle and Boethius Syllogisms in Aristotle and Boethius Can BAŞKENT ILLC, UvA June 23, 2006 Categorical Syllogism in Aristotle Definitions Figures of Categorical Syllogism Hypothetical Syllogism in Aristotle Hints in Texts

More information

6.5 Exposition of the Fifteen Valid Forms of the Categorical Syllogism

6.5 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 information

Venn Diagrams and Categorical Syllogisms. Unit 5

Venn 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 information

Ancient Philosophy Handout #1: Logic Overview

Ancient 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 information

Baronett, Logic (4th ed.) Chapter Guide

Baronett, Logic (4th ed.) Chapter Guide Chapter 6: Categorical Syllogisms Baronett, Logic (4th ed.) Chapter Guide A. Standard-form Categorical Syllogisms A categorical syllogism is an argument containing three categorical propositions: two premises

More information

Richard L. W. Clarke, Notes REASONING

Richard 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 information

CHAPTER III. Of Opposition.

CHAPTER III. Of Opposition. CHAPTER III. Of Opposition. Section 449. Opposition is an immediate inference grounded on the relation between propositions which have the same terms, but differ in quantity or in quality or in both. Section

More information

7. Some recent rulings of the Supreme Court were politically motivated decisions that flouted the entire history of U.S. legal practice.

7. 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 information

Deduction. Of all the modes of reasoning, deductive arguments have the strongest relationship between the premises

Deduction. 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 information

Philosophy 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 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 information

Anthony P. Andres. The Place of Conversion in Aristotelian Logic. Anthony P. Andres

Anthony P. Andres. The Place of Conversion in Aristotelian Logic. Anthony P. Andres [ Loyola Book Comp., run.tex: 0 AQR Vol. W rev. 0, 17 Jun 2009 ] [The Aquinas Review Vol. W rev. 0: 1 The Place of Conversion in Aristotelian Logic From at least the time of John of St. Thomas, scholastic

More information

The basic form of a syllogism By Timo Schmitz, Philosopher

The basic form of a syllogism By Timo Schmitz, Philosopher The basic form of a syllogism By Timo Schmitz, Philosopher In my article What is logic? (02 April 2017), I pointed out that an apophantic sentence is always a proposition. To find out whether the formal

More information

Unit. Categorical Syllogism. What is a syllogism? Types of Syllogism

Unit. 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 information

Dr. Carlo Alvaro Reasoning and Argumentation Distribution & Opposition DISTRIBUTION

Dr. Carlo Alvaro Reasoning and Argumentation Distribution & Opposition DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION Categorical propositions are statements that describe classes (groups) of objects designate by the subject and the predicate terms. A class is a group of things that have something in common

More information

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

Unit 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 information

5.3 The Four Kinds of Categorical Propositions

5.3 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 information

Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic

Logic 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 information

Unit 7.3. Contraries E. Contradictories. Sub-contraries

Unit 7.3. Contraries E. Contradictories. Sub-contraries What is opposition of Unit 7.3 Square of Opposition Four categorical propositions A, E, I and O are related and at the same time different from each other. The relation among them is explained by a diagram

More information

Part 2 Module 4: Categorical Syllogisms

Part 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 information

Ibn Sīnā on Logical Analysis. Wilfrid Hodges and Amirouche Moktefi

Ibn Sīnā on Logical Analysis. Wilfrid Hodges and Amirouche Moktefi Ibn Sīnā on Logical Analysis Wilfrid Hodges and Amirouche Moktefi Draft January 2013 2 Contents 1 Ibn Sīnā himself 5 1.1 Life................................. 5 1.2 Colleagues and students.....................

More information

What is a logical argument? What is deductive reasoning? Fundamentals of Academic Writing

What is a logical argument? What is deductive reasoning? Fundamentals of Academic Writing What is a logical argument? What is deductive reasoning? Fundamentals of Academic Writing Logical relations Deductive logic Claims to provide conclusive support for the truth of a conclusion Inductive

More information

Logic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE

Logic: 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 information

Syllogism. Exam Importance Exam Importance. CAT Very Important IBPS/Bank PO Very Important. XAT Very Important BANK Clerk Very Important

Syllogism. Exam Importance Exam Importance. CAT Very Important IBPS/Bank PO Very Important. XAT Very Important BANK Clerk Very Important 1 About Disha publication One of the leading publishers in India, Disha Publication provides books and study materials for schools and various competitive exams being continuously held across the country.

More information

Logic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER VI CONDITIONS OF IMMEDIATE INFERENCE

Logic: 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 information

Selections from Aristotle s Prior Analytics 41a21 41b5

Selections 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 information

Aristotle ( ) His scientific thinking, his physics.

Aristotle ( ) His scientific thinking, his physics. Aristotle (384-322) His scientific thinking, his physics. Aristotle: short biography Aristotle was a Greek philosopher, a student of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great. He wrote on many different

More information

HOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT

HOW 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 information

2. Refutations can be stronger or weaker.

2. Refutations can be stronger or weaker. Lecture 8: Refutation Philosophy 130 October 25 & 27, 2016 O Rourke I. Administrative A. Schedule see syllabus as well! B. Questions? II. Refutation A. Arguments are typically used to establish conclusions.

More information

1 Clarion Logic Notes Chapter 4

1 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 information

C. Exam #1 comments on difficult spots; if you have questions about this, please let me know. D. Discussion of extra credit opportunities

C. Exam #1 comments on difficult spots; if you have questions about this, please let me know. D. Discussion of extra credit opportunities Lecture 8: Refutation Philosophy 130 March 19 & 24, 2015 O Rourke I. Administrative A. Roll B. Schedule C. Exam #1 comments on difficult spots; if you have questions about this, please let me know D. Discussion

More information

Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak.

Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak. On Interpretation By Aristotle Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak. First we must define the terms 'noun' and 'verb', then the terms 'denial' and 'affirmation',

More information

Am I free? Freedom vs. Fate

Am I free? Freedom vs. Fate Am I free? Freedom vs. Fate We ve been discussing the free will defense as a response to the argument from evil. This response assumes something about us: that we have free will. But what does this mean?

More information

Philosophy 1100: Ethics

Philosophy 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 information

On Interpretation. Section 1. Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill. Part 1

On Interpretation. Section 1. Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill. Part 1 On Interpretation Aristotle Translated by E. M. Edghill Section 1 Part 1 First we must define the terms noun and verb, then the terms denial and affirmation, then proposition and sentence. Spoken words

More information

Study Guides. Chapter 1 - Basic Training

Study 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 information

What would count as Ibn Sīnā (11th century Persia) having first order logic?

What 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 information

Essence and Necessity, and the Aristotelian Modal Syllogistic: A Historical and Analytical Study

Essence and Necessity, and the Aristotelian Modal Syllogistic: A Historical and Analytical Study Marquette University e-publications@marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects Essence and Necessity, and the Aristotelian Modal Syllogistic: A Historical and Analytical

More information

Bertrand Russell Proper Names, Adjectives and Verbs 1

Bertrand Russell Proper Names, Adjectives and Verbs 1 Bertrand Russell Proper Names, Adjectives and Verbs 1 Analysis 46 Philosophical grammar can shed light on philosophical questions. Grammatical differences can be used as a source of discovery and a guide

More information

Logic Primer. Elihu Carranza, Ph.D. Inky Publication Napa, California

Logic Primer. Elihu Carranza, Ph.D. Inky Publication Napa, California Logic Primer Elihu Carranza, Ph.D. Inky Publication Napa, California Logic Primer Copyright 2012 Elihu Carranza, Ph.D. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any

More information

Why There s Nothing You Can Say to Change My Mind: The Principle of Non-Contradiction in Aristotle s Metaphysics

Why There s Nothing You Can Say to Change My Mind: The Principle of Non-Contradiction in Aristotle s Metaphysics Davis 1 Why There s Nothing You Can Say to Change My Mind: The Principle of Non-Contradiction in Aristotle s Metaphysics William Davis Red River Undergraduate Philosophy Conference North Dakota State University

More information

Relevance. 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 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 information

L4: Reasoning. Dani Navarro

L4: 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 information

Early Russell on Philosophical Grammar

Early Russell on Philosophical Grammar Early Russell on Philosophical Grammar G. J. Mattey Fall, 2005 / Philosophy 156 Philosophical Grammar The study of grammar, in my opinion, is capable of throwing far more light on philosophical questions

More information

Critical Thinking is:

Critical Thinking is: Logic: Day 1 Critical Thinking is: Thinking clearly and following rules of logic and rationality It s not being argumentative just for the sake of arguing Academics disagree about which departments do

More information

Informalizing Formal Logic

Informalizing Formal Logic Informalizing Formal Logic Antonis Kakas Department of Computer Science, University of Cyprus, Cyprus antonis@ucy.ac.cy Abstract. This paper discusses how the basic notions of formal logic can be expressed

More information

1/10. Descartes and Spinoza on the Laws of Nature

1/10. Descartes and Spinoza on the Laws of Nature 1/10 Descartes and Spinoza on the Laws of Nature Last time we set out the grounds for understanding the general approach to bodies that Descartes provides in the second part of the Principles of Philosophy

More information

1. Immediate inferences embodied in the square of opposition 2. Obversion 3. Conversion

1. Immediate inferences embodied in the square of opposition 2. Obversion 3. Conversion CHAPTER 3: CATEGORICAL INFERENCES Inference is the process by which the truth of one proposition (the conclusion) is affirmed on the basis of the truth of one or more other propositions that serve as its

More information

Verificationism. PHIL September 27, 2011

Verificationism. PHIL September 27, 2011 Verificationism PHIL 83104 September 27, 2011 1. The critique of metaphysics... 1 2. Observation statements... 2 3. In principle verifiability... 3 4. Strong verifiability... 3 4.1. Conclusive verifiability

More information

10.3 Universal and Existential Quantifiers

10.3 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 information

Pastor-teacher Don Hargrove Faith Bible Church September 8, 2011

Pastor-teacher Don Hargrove Faith Bible Church   September 8, 2011 Pastor-teacher 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 information

15. Russell on definite descriptions

15. Russell on definite descriptions 15. Russell on definite descriptions Martín Abreu Zavaleta July 30, 2015 Russell was another top logician and philosopher of his time. Like Frege, Russell got interested in denotational expressions as

More information

In a previous lecture, we used Aristotle s syllogisms to emphasize the

In a previous lecture, we used Aristotle s syllogisms to emphasize the The Flow of Argument Lecture 9 In a previous lecture, we used Aristotle s syllogisms to emphasize the central concept of validity. Visualizing syllogisms in terms of three-circle Venn diagrams gave us

More information

Ayer on the criterion of verifiability

Ayer on the criterion of verifiability Ayer on the criterion of verifiability November 19, 2004 1 The critique of metaphysics............................. 1 2 Observation statements............................... 2 3 In principle verifiability...............................

More information

IS THE SYLLOGISTIC A LOGIC? it is not a theory or formal ontology, a system concerned with general features of the

IS THE SYLLOGISTIC A LOGIC? it is not a theory or formal ontology, a system concerned with general features of the IS THE SYLLOGISTIC A LOGIC? Much of the last fifty years of scholarship on Aristotle s syllogistic suggests a conceptual framework under which the syllogistic is a logic, a system of inferential reasoning,

More information

Philosophy of Logic. A tree of logic. 1. Traditional Logic. A. Basic Logic. 2. Orthodox Modern Logic. Chap2 Brief History of Logic

Philosophy of Logic. A tree of logic. 1. Traditional Logic. A. Basic Logic. 2. Orthodox Modern Logic. Chap2 Brief History of Logic Chap2 Brief History of Logic Philosophy of Logic qjshao@fudan.edu.cn I. II. A Map of Logic Logic in Western III. Logic in Ancient India IV. Logic in Ancient China V. The status of Logic in contemporary

More information

A Primer on Logic Part 1: Preliminaries and Vocabulary. Jason Zarri. 1. An Easy $10.00? a 3 c 2. (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

A Primer on Logic Part 1: Preliminaries and Vocabulary. Jason Zarri. 1. An Easy $10.00? a 3 c 2. (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) A Primer on Logic Part 1: Preliminaries and Vocabulary Jason Zarri 1. An Easy $10.00? Suppose someone were to bet you $10.00 that you would fail a seemingly simple test of your reasoning skills. Feeling

More information

6: 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 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 information

CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS

CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS Fall 2001 ENGLISH 20 Professor Tanaka CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS In this first handout, I would like to simply give you the basic outlines of our critical thinking model

More information

logic, symbolic logic, traditional

logic, symbolic logic, traditional Hughes, R. I. G. The Structure and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989. Kripke, Saul. Is There a Problem about Substitutional Quantification? In Truth and

More information

Moore on External Relations

Moore on External Relations Moore on External Relations G. J. Mattey Fall, 2005 / Philosophy 156 The Dogma of Internal Relations Moore claims that there is a dogma held by philosophers such as Bradley and Joachim, that all relations

More information

Logic: A Brief Introduction. Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University

Logic: 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 information

THREE LOGICIANS: ARISTOTLE, SACCHERI, FREGE

THREE LOGICIANS: ARISTOTLE, SACCHERI, FREGE 1 THREE LOGICIANS: ARISTOTLE, SACCHERI, FREGE Acta philosophica, (Roma) 7, 1998, 115-120 Ignacio Angelelli Philosophy Department The University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX, 78712 plac565@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu

More information

Courses providing assessment data PHL 202. Semester/Year

Courses providing assessment data PHL 202. Semester/Year 1 Department/Program 2012-2016 Assessment Plan Department: Philosophy Directions: For each department/program student learning outcome, the department will provide an assessment plan, giving detailed information

More information

Introduction to Philosophy

Introduction to Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy PHIL 2000--Call # 41480 Kent Baldner Teaching Assistant: Mitchell Winget Discussion sections ( Labs ) meet on Wednesdays, starting next Wednesday, Sept. 5 th. 10:00-10:50, 1115

More information

What is the Frege/Russell Analysis of Quantification? Scott Soames

What is the Frege/Russell Analysis of Quantification? Scott Soames What is the Frege/Russell Analysis of Quantification? Scott Soames The Frege-Russell analysis of quantification was a fundamental advance in semantics and philosophical logic. Abstracting away from details

More information

SOME RADICAL CONSEQUENCES OF GEACH'S LOGICAL THEORIES

SOME RADICAL CONSEQUENCES OF GEACH'S LOGICAL THEORIES SOME RADICAL CONSEQUENCES OF GEACH'S LOGICAL THEORIES By james CAIN ETER Geach's views of relative identity, together with his Paccount of proper names and quantifiers, 1 while presenting what I believe

More information

7.1. Unit. Terms and Propositions. Nature of propositions. Types of proposition. Classification of propositions

7.1. Unit. Terms and Propositions. Nature of propositions. Types of proposition. Classification of propositions Unit 7.1 Terms and Propositions Nature of propositions A proposition is a unit of reasoning or logical thinking. Both premises and conclusion of reasoning are propositions. Since propositions are so important,

More information

Broad on Theological Arguments. I. The Ontological Argument

Broad on Theological Arguments. I. The Ontological Argument Broad on God Broad on Theological Arguments I. The Ontological Argument Sample Ontological Argument: Suppose that God is the most perfect or most excellent being. Consider two things: (1)An entity that

More information

Artificial 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 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 information

INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 1 Sets, Relations, and Arguments

INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 1 Sets, Relations, and Arguments INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 1 Sets, Relations, and Arguments Volker Halbach Pure logic is the ruin of the spirit. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry The Logic Manual The Logic Manual The Logic Manual The Logic Manual

More information

Introduction to Philosophy

Introduction to Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy Philosophy 110W Russell Marcus Hamilton College, Fall 2013 Class 1 - Introduction to Introduction to Philosophy My name is Russell. My office is 202 College Hill Road, Room 210.

More information

16. Universal derivation

16. 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 information

Entailment, with nods to Lewy and Smiley

Entailment, with nods to Lewy and Smiley Entailment, with nods to Lewy and Smiley Peter Smith November 20, 2009 Last week, we talked a bit about the Anderson-Belnap logic of entailment, as discussed in Priest s Introduction to Non-Classical Logic.

More information

Overview of Today s Lecture

Overview of Today s Lecture Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 1 Overview of Today s Lecture Music: Robin Trower, Daydream (King Biscuit Flower Hour concert, 1977) Administrative Stuff (lots of it) Course Website/Syllabus [i.e.,

More information

But we may go further: not only Jones, but no actual man, enters into my statement. This becomes obvious when the statement is false, since then

But we may go further: not only Jones, but no actual man, enters into my statement. This becomes obvious when the statement is false, since then CHAPTER XVI DESCRIPTIONS We dealt in the preceding chapter with the words all and some; in this chapter we shall consider the word the in the singular, and in the next chapter we shall consider the word

More information

John Buridan. Summulae de Dialectica IX Sophismata

John Buridan. Summulae de Dialectica IX Sophismata John Buridan John Buridan (c. 1295 c. 1359) was born in Picardy (France). He was educated in Paris and taught there. He wrote a number of works focusing on exposition and discussion of issues in Aristotle

More information

Aquinas' Third Way Modalized

Aquinas' Third Way Modalized Philosophy of Religion Aquinas' Third Way Modalized Robert E. Maydole Davidson College bomaydole@davidson.edu ABSTRACT: The Third Way is the most interesting and insightful of Aquinas' five arguments for

More information

Introduction. I. Proof of the Minor Premise ( All reality is completely intelligible )

Introduction. I. Proof of the Minor Premise ( All reality is completely intelligible ) Philosophical Proof of God: Derived from Principles in Bernard Lonergan s Insight May 2014 Robert J. Spitzer, S.J., Ph.D. Magis Center of Reason and Faith Lonergan s proof may be stated as follows: Introduction

More information

Chapter 8 - Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms

Chapter 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 truth-value of a given truth-functional compound proposition depends

More information

Categorical Logic Handout Logic: Spring Sound: Any valid argument with true premises.

Categorical 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 information

The Appeal to Reason. Introductory Logic pt. 1

The Appeal to Reason. Introductory Logic pt. 1 The Appeal to Reason Introductory Logic pt. 1 Argument vs. Argumentation The difference is important as demonstrated by these famous philosophers. The Origins of Logic: (highlights) Aristotle (385-322

More information

Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments

Part 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 information

Reply to Bronstein, Leunissen, and Beere

Reply to Bronstein, Leunissen, and Beere Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. XC No. 3, May 2015 doi: 10.1111/phpr.12181 2015 Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LLC Reply to Bronstein,

More information

To better understand VALIDITY, we now turn to the topic of logical form.

To better understand VALIDITY, we now turn to the topic of logical form. LOGIC GUIDE 2 To better understand VALIDITY, we now turn to the topic of logical form. LOGICAL FORM The logical form of a statement or argument is the skeleton, or structure. If you retain only the words

More information

Figure 1 Figure 2 U S S. non-p P P

Figure 1 Figure 2 U S S. non-p P P 1 Depicting negation in diagrammatic logic: legacy and prospects Fabien Schang, Amirouche Moktefi schang.fabien@voila.fr amirouche.moktefi@gersulp.u-strasbg.fr Abstract Here are considered the conditions

More information

The Problem of Major Premise in Buddhist Logic

The 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 information

Ayer s linguistic theory of the a priori

Ayer s linguistic theory of the a priori Ayer s linguistic theory of the a priori phil 43904 Jeff Speaks December 4, 2007 1 The problem of a priori knowledge....................... 1 2 Necessity and the a priori............................ 2

More information

PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy

PHI 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 information

Durham Research Online

Durham Research Online Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 20 October 2016 Version of attached le: Published Version Peer-review status of attached le: Not peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Uckelman, Sara L. (2016)

More information

Identify the subject and predicate terms in, and name the form of, each of the following propositions.

Identify the subject and predicate terms in, and name the form of, each of the following propositions. M05_COPI1396_13_SE_C05.QXD 10/12/07 9:00 PM Page 187 5.4 Quality, Quantity, and Distribution 187 EXERCISES Identify the subject and predicate terms in, and name the form of, each of the following propositions.

More information

Reasoning SYLLOGISM. follows.

Reasoning SYLLOGISM. follows. Reasoning SYLLOGISM RULES FOR DERIVING CONCLUSIONS 1. The Conclusion does not contain the Middle Term (M). Premises : All spoons are plates. Some spoons are cups. Invalid Conclusion : All spoons are cups.

More information

Predicate logic. Miguel Palomino Dpto. Sistemas Informáticos y Computación (UCM) Madrid Spain

Predicate logic. Miguel Palomino Dpto. Sistemas Informáticos y Computación (UCM) Madrid Spain Predicate logic Miguel Palomino Dpto. Sistemas Informáticos y Computación (UCM) 28040 Madrid Spain Synonyms. First-order logic. Question 1. Describe this discipline/sub-discipline, and some of its more

More information

REASONING SYLLOGISM. Subject Predicate Distributed Not Distributed Distributed Distributed

REASONING SYLLOGISM. Subject Predicate Distributed Not Distributed Distributed Distributed REASONING SYLLOGISM DISTRIBUTION OF THE TERMS The word "Distrlbution" is meant to characterise the ways in which terrns can occur in Categorical Propositions. A Proposition distributes a terrn if it refers

More information

Logical (formal) fallacies

Logical (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 information

What we want to know is: why might one adopt this fatalistic attitude in response to reflection on the existence of truths about the future?

What we want to know is: why might one adopt this fatalistic attitude in response to reflection on the existence of truths about the future? Fate and free will From the first person point of view, one of the most obvious, and important, facts about the world is that some things are up to us at least sometimes, we are able to do one thing, and

More information

Mr Vibrating: Yes I did. Man: You didn t Mr Vibrating: I did! Man: You didn t! Mr Vibrating: I m telling you I did! Man: You did not!!

Mr Vibrating: Yes I did. Man: You didn t Mr Vibrating: I did! Man: You didn t! Mr Vibrating: I m telling you I did! Man: You did not!! Arguments Man: Ah. I d like to have an argument, please. Receptionist: Certainly sir. Have you been here before? Man: No, I haven t, this is my first time. Receptionist: I see. Well, do you want to have

More information

William Ockham on Universals

William Ockham on Universals MP_C07.qxd 11/17/06 5:28 PM Page 71 7 William Ockham on Universals Ockham s First Theory: A Universal is a Fictum One can plausibly say that a universal is not a real thing inherent in a subject [habens

More information