In view of the fact that IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES

Similar documents
PHI 244. Environmental Ethics. Introduction. Argument Worksheet. Argument Worksheet. Welcome to PHI 244, Environmental Ethics. About Stephen.

What is an argument? PHIL 110. Is this an argument? Is this an argument? What about this? And what about this?

ARGUMENTS. Arguments. arguments

Philosophy 1100: Ethics

Revisiting the Socrates Example

There are two common forms of deductively valid conditional argument: modus ponens and modus tollens.

Relevance. Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true

Chapter 1. What is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life

1. To arrive at the truth we have to reason correctly. 2. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. B. DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

Philosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI

PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy

HANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.)

A R G U M E N T S I N A C T I O N

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ

CHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument

PHILOSOPHY 102 INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC PRACTICE EXAM 1. W# Section (10 or 11) 4. T F The statements that compose a disjunction are called conjuncts.

Practice Test Three Spring True or False True = A, False = B

Study Guides. Chapter 1 - Basic Training

Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction

Artificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering

Practice Test Three Fall True or False True = A, False = B

HANDBOOK. IV. Argument Construction Determine the Ultimate Conclusion Construct the Chain of Reasoning Communicate the Argument 13

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

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

Criticizing Arguments

Logical (formal) fallacies

Philosophical Arguments

Those who doubt the writing is from the autistic children themselves, lack compassion, and should stay the hell out of our lives!

Chapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111)

14.6 Speaking Ethically and Avoiding Fallacies L E A R N I N G O B JE C T I V E S

The Roman empire ended, the Mongol empire ended, the Persian empire ended, the British empire ended, all empires end, and none lasts forever.

Reading Comprehension Fallacies in Reading

The Philosopher s World Cup

CRITICAL THINKING. Formal v Informal Fallacies

Galen A. Foresman, Peter S. Fosl, and Jamie Carlin Watson CRITICAL THINKING

Critical Thinking 5.7 Validity in inductive, conductive, and abductive arguments

Logic Book Part 1! by Skylar Ruloff!

Logic: The Science that Evaluates Arguments

PHIL 115: Philosophical Anthropology. I. Propositional Forms (in Stoic Logic) Lecture #4: Stoic Logic

Deccan Education Society s FERGUSSON COLLEGE, PUNE (AUTONOMOUS) SYLLABUS UNDER AUTONOMY FIRST YEAR B.A. LOGIC SEMESTER I

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

LOGIC. Inductive Reasoning. Wednesday, April 20, 16

PHIL2642 CRITICAL THINKING USYD NOTES PART 1: LECTURE NOTES

Fallacies are deceptive errors of thinking.

Session 10 INDUCTIVE REASONONING IN THE SCIENCES & EVERYDAY LIFE( PART 1)

Argument. What is it? How do I make a good one?

T. Parent. I shall explain these steps in turn. Let s consider the following passage to illustrate the process:

2/21/2014. FOUR WAYS OF KNOWING (Justifiable True Belief) 1. Sensory input; 2. Authoritative knowledge; 3. Logic and reason; 4. Faith and intuition

Handout 1: Arguments -- the basics because, since, given that, for because Given that Since for Because

Logic, reasoning and fallacies. Example 0: valid reasoning. Decide how to make a random choice. Valid reasoning. Random choice of X, Y, Z, n

Chapter 8 - Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms

The antecendent always a expresses a sufficient condition for the consequent

The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism

National Quali cations

Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning Strong Syllogism

Does Deduction really rest on a more secure epistemological footing than Induction?

Philosophy of Love, Sex, and Friendship WESTON. Arguments General Points. Arguments are sets of reasons in support of a conclusion.

Tutorial A03: Patterns of Valid Arguments By: Jonathan Chan

b) 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.

Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic

Lecture 4: Deductive Validity

MPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic

Directions: For Problems 1-10, determine whether the given statement is either True (A) or False (B).

Section 3.5. Symbolic Arguments. Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc.

Part 2 Module 4: Categorical Syllogisms

Fallacies in logic. Hasty Generalization. Post Hoc (Faulty cause) Slippery Slope

stage 2 Logic & Knowledge

The Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments)

Phil 3304 Introduction to Logic Dr. David Naugle. Identifying Arguments i

I. Claim: a concise summary, stated or implied, of an argument s main idea, or point. Many arguments will present multiple claims.

Arguments. 1. using good premises (ones you have good reason to believe are both true and relevant to the issue at hand),

Christ-Centered Critical Thinking. Lesson 7: Logical Fallacies

Lecture 1: Validity & Soundness

Full file at

Reading and Evaluating Arguments

Section 3.5. Symbolic Arguments. Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc.

PRIMER CHART 1_LOGICAL FALLACIES

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

accent, fallacy of accident, fallacy of accuracy act-deontology affirming the antecedent affirming the consequent ambiguous, ambiguity ampersand (&)

Unit 4. Reason as a way of knowing

Our Guide to Better Grades

HANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.)

Chapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic)

I. What is an Argument?

Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 1. Background Material for the Exercise on Validity

Lemon Bay High School AP Language and Composition ENC 1102 Mr. Hertz

The Argumentative Essay

Norva Y S Lo Produced by Norva Y S Lo Edited by Andrew Brennan

Reductionism in Fallacy Theory

Fallacies. Definition: The premises of an argument do support a particular conclusion but not the conclusion that the arguer actually draws.

Logic & Fallacies. An argument is, to quote the Monty Python sketch, "a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition".

Also, in Argument #1 (Lecture 11, Slide 11), the inference from steps 2 and 3 to 4 is stated as:

I. Subject-verb agreement (393-4), parallelism (402), and mixed construction (418-19).

Lecture 3 Arguments Jim Pryor What is an Argument? Jim Pryor Vocabulary Describing Arguments

GENERAL NOTES ON THIS CLASS

3.2: FAULTY REASONING AND PROPAGANDA. Ms. Hargen

24.09x Guide to Logic and Argumentation

HOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT

Recall. Validity: If the premises are true the conclusion must be true. Soundness. Valid; and. Premises are true

Video: How does understanding whether or not an argument is inductive or deductive help me?

Transcription:

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. (2) Not here, Bob! (3) I think I m going to sell little Joey into slavery. Instructions: Identify the premises and conclusions in the following arguments, and identify any premise and conclusion indicators. (4) English is the best language since it s the only one that I speak. (5) Bob likes to argue all the time, and for that reason he would make a good lawyer. (6) In view of the fact that Joe cheated on his taxes, we consequently cannot appoint him to the ethics committee. Instructions: Diagram the following arguments. First number each statement, then use plus signs and arrows to designate the argument structure as either a joint inference or an independent inference. (7) Joe has no friends since the only people he knows are on Facebook, and those aren t real friends. (8) Bob was voted most popular student in class, and Bob is always seen with lots of people around him. Thus, Bob has many friends. (9) Joe and Bob aren t friends because each says that he can t stand the other, and each angrily insults the other when they pass in the hall. Premise Indicators Since For Because Given that For the reason that In view of the fact that Conclusion Indicators Therefore Thus Hence So Accordingly For this reason Consequently It follows that Argument Diagrams Joint inference: 1+2 3 Independent inference: 1 3 and 2 3

Instructions: Identify the informal fallacy in each of the following. (10) The Dead Milkmen is a rock band. Most people who were once milkmen in the U.S. are now dead. Yikes! That s one big rock band! (11) Hey, forget about Beth, she s nothing special. Is there anything special about her kidneys, tonsils, or small intestine? She s only a collection of those things. (12) Of course the Major thinks that the Army offers good career opportunities. He s an Army man himself. (13) I think Beth will go out with you. I haven t heard anything which suggests that she wouldn t. (14) We have a good faculty here at Preppy State University. Therefore, Dr. Joseph Drunkard, who teaches here, is a good faculty member. FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE Argument against the Person (argumentum ad hominem): attacking a person s character instead of the content of that person s argument. Argument from Ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantiam): concluding that something is true since you can t prove it is false. Appeal to Pity (argumentum ad misericordiam): appealing to a person s unfortunate circumstance as a way of getting someone to accept a conclusion. Appeal to the Masses (argumentum ad populum): going along with the crowd in support of a conclusion. Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam): appealing to a popular figure who is not an authority in that area Irrelevant Conclusion (non sequitur): drawing a conclusion which does not follow from the evidence. OTHER COMMON FALLACIES False Cause (post hoc ergo procter hoc): inferring a causal connection based on mere correlation. Circular Reasoning: implicitly using your conclusion as a premise. Equivocation: an argument which is based on two definitions of one word. Composition: assuming that the whole must have the properties of its parts. Division: assuming that the parts of a whole must have the properties of the whole. Red Herring: introducing an irrelevant or secondary subject and thereby diverting attention from the main subject. Straw Man: distorting an opposing view so that it is easy to refute.

Instructions: In each of the following identify the logical connective being used and translate the proposition into standard form. (15) Father Joe s marriage to Beth implies that he first leaves the priesthood. (16) I was accepted at Yale University, but I d much rather attend Thrift Community College. (17) Bob s name does not appear on Santa s nice list. Instructions: Determine which of the following are well-formed nested propositions. (18) if P then (Q or R) (19) (P and Q) not (20) not (P or Q) (21) P and (if Q then R) Conditional: if P then Q Negation: not P Conjunction Clue Words ( And ) P, but Q P, although Q P; Q P, besides Q P, however Q P, whereas Q Conditional Clue Words ( If- Then ) If P, it follows that Q P implies Q P entails Q Whenever P, Q P, therefore Q Q follows from P Q, since P Logical Connectives Conjunction: P and Q Disjunction: P or Q

Instructions: Translate the following premises and conclusions into standard form and decide which valid argument form or fallacious argument form is being used. (22) If the band Satan s Pitchfork performs in town, they will play Hell, Sweet Hell. If they perform Hell, Sweet Hell then dudes will stage dive. Therefore, if they perform, dudes will stage dive. (23) Either Bob will go bankrupt, or I will. Bob will go bankrupt. Therefore, I will not. (24) If Joe flunks out of college, then his brother Bob will inherit the family business. Joe will not flunk out of college. Therefore, Bob will not inherit the family business. Instructions: Make up a valid argument that leads to the conclusion given. Use the rule indicated in parentheses. You will need to invent some simple proposition to make your premises complete. (25) Polly wants a cracker. (disjunctive syllogism) (26) If you insult Beth s mother, you will go to the hospital. (hypothetical syllogism) (27) Joe will fail his exam. (modus ponens) (28) Thrift Community College is a good school. (modus tollens) Modus Ponens premise (2) P concl. (3) Therefore, Q Modus Tollens premise (2) Not Q concl. (3) Therefore, not P Disjunctive Syllogism (two versions) premise (1) P or Q premise (2) not P concl. (3) therefore, Q Hypothetical Syllogism premise (1) if P then Q premise (2) if Q then R concl. (3) Therefore, if P then R

Instructions: Are the following arguments valid, invalid, sound, or unsound? (29) If Fido is a Dalmatian, then Fido would have lots of spots It is not the case that Fido is a Dalmatian Therefore, it is not the case that Fido has lots of spots (30) If Joseph Stalin had U.S. citizenship, then he would have been born in the U.S. It is not the case that Joseph Stalin was born in the U.S. Therefore, it is not the case that Joseph Stalin had U.S. citizenship. Instructions: The following test your understanding of soundness. (31) Can a valid argument have a false conclusion? (32) Can a sound argument have a false conclusion? Modus Ponens premise (2) P concl. (3) Therefore, Q Modus Tollens premise (2) Not Q concl. (3) Therefore, not P Disjunctive Syllogism (two versions) premise (1) P or Q premise (2) not P concl. (3) therefore, Q Hypothetical Syllogism premise (1) if P then Q premise (2) if Q then R concl. (3) Therefore, if P then R

Instructions: What is the inductive strength of each of the following (that is, very strong, strong, weak, very weak)? (33) Some notable guitarist have died in their 20s. Joe is a notable guitarist. Therefore, Joe will probably die in his 20s. (34) College dropouts make $1 million less during their careers than college graduates. Joe is a college dropout. Therefore, Joe will probably make around $1 million less during his career than an average college graduate. (35) College students with seven or more body piercings have a significantly higher rate of deviant behavior than students with no piercings. Joe has only one body piercing. Therefore Joe has only a slightly higher rate of deviant behavior than students with no piercings. Inductive Probability Inductively very strong: probability is close to certain. Inductively strong: probability is high. Inductively weak: probability is low. Inductively very weak: probability is close to non-existent.

Instructions: For each of the following, indicate the inductive argument form that is followed, and whether it commits any inductive fallacy. (36) Joe and Bob live in the same town, listen to the same music, and like the same sports teams. Joe is Presbyterian. Therefore, Bob is probably also Presbyterian. (37) 60% of college students in the U.S. are women. Preppy State University is a U.S. College. Therefore, there is a very high probability that the next student who walks out of Preppy State s student center will be a woman. (38) 100% of 20 randomly surveyed adults in the small town of Hornbeak, Tennessee shop at Walmart. Therefore, 100% of Americans shop at Walmart. Statistical syllogism: drawing a conclusion about an individual based on the population as a whole. premise (1) n percentage of a population has attribute A. premise (2) x is a member of that population. concl. (3) Therefore, there is an n percent probability that x has A. Fallacy of small proportion: a conclusion is too strong to be supported by the small population proportion with the attribute. Statistical induction: drawing a conclusion about a population based on a sample. premise (1) n percent of a sample has attribute A. concl. (2) Therefore, n percent of a population probably has attribute A. Fallacy of small sample: a conclusion is too strong to be supported by a small sample number. Fallacy of biased sample: a conclusion is too strong to be supported by a nonrandom sampling technique. Argument from Analogy: drawing a conclusion about one individual based on its similarities with another individual. premise (1) Objects x and y each have attributes A, B and C. premise (2) Object x has an additional attribute D. concl. (3) Therefore, object y probably also has attribute D. Fallacy of false analogy: comparing two items that have trivial points in common, but differ from each other in more significant ways.