Plato s Allegory of the Cave

Similar documents
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.

Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC FOR METAPHYSICIANS

Revisiting the Socrates Example

5.6.1 Formal validity in categorical deductive arguments

PHIL2642 CRITICAL THINKING USYD NOTES PART 1: LECTURE NOTES

Argument and Persuasion. Stating Opinions and Proposals

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

The Appeal to Reason. Introductory Logic pt. 1

Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction

1. Introduction Formal deductive logic Overview

Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 2. Background Material for the Exercise on Inference Indicators

Formal Logic. Mind your Ps and Qs!

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

Moore on External Relations

Why Good Science Is Not Value-Free

Richard L. W. Clarke, Notes REASONING

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

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

DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY FALL 2013 COURSE DESCRIPTIONS

INDUCTION. All inductive reasoning is based on an assumption called the UNIFORMITY OF NATURE.

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

CHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument

IDHEF Chapter 2 Why Should Anyone Believe Anything At All?

Instructor s Manual 1

Welcome to Philosophy!

Critical Thinking is:

CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS

LOGIC ANTHONY KAPOLKA FYF 101-9/3/2010

PART III - Symbolic Logic Chapter 7 - Sentential Propositions

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

Logic: A Brief Introduction

Introduction to Philosophy Practice Exam One. True or False A = True, B= False

Ling 98a: The Meaning of Negation (Week 1)

Intro Viewed from a certain angle, philosophy is about what, if anything, we ought to believe.

Lecture 4.2 Aquinas Phil Religion TOPIC: Aquinas Cosmological Arguments for the existence of God. Critiques of Aquinas arguments.

Courses providing assessment data PHL 202. Semester/Year

A. Problem set #3 it has been posted and is due Tuesday, 15 November

Argumentation Module: Philosophy Lesson 7 What do we mean by argument? (Two meanings for the word.) A quarrel or a dispute, expressing a difference

HOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT

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

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

Argumentative Analogy versus Figurative Analogy

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

SOME RADICAL CONSEQUENCES OF GEACH'S LOGICAL THEORIES

Philosophy 1100: Ethics

Introduction to Philosophy

DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY FALL 2014 COURSE DESCRIPTIONS

Logic: The Science that Evaluates Arguments

Lecture 2.1 INTRO TO LOGIC/ ARGUMENTS. Recognize an argument when you see one (in media, articles, people s claims).

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

Aristotle ( ) His scientific thinking, his physics.

Sophie s World. Chapter 4 The Natural Philosophers

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

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

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

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

1.6 Validity and Truth

PHI Introduction Lecture 4. An Overview of the Two Branches of Logic

Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments

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

PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy

An Introduction to. Formal Logic. Second edition. Peter Smith, February 27, 2019

HAVE WE REASON TO DO AS RATIONALITY REQUIRES? A COMMENT ON RAZ

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

In view of the fact that IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES

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

Introduction to Philosophy

Portfolio Project. Phil 251A Logic Fall Due: Friday, December 7

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

Statements, Arguments, Validity. Philosophy and Logic Unit 1, Sections 1.1, 1.2

Postmodal Metaphysics

A short introduction to formal logic

CS 2104 Intro Problem Solving in Computer Science Test 1 READ THIS NOW!

Philosophical Arguments

KANT, MORAL DUTY AND THE DEMANDS OF PURE PRACTICAL REASON. The law is reason unaffected by desire.

BASIC CONCEPTS OF LOGIC

Russell: On Denoting

Logic for Computer Science - Week 1 Introduction to Informal Logic

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

Chapter 8 - Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms

Charles Saunders Peirce ( )

Wednesday, April 20, 16. Introduction to Philosophy

Experimental Design. Introduction

Introduction to Philosophy

Complications for Categorical Syllogisms. PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning February 27, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University

Key Vocab and Concepts. Ethics, Epistemology, Aesthetics, logic, social and political, religious, metaphysics

Fatalism and Truth at a Time Chad Marxen

An Interview with Jaakko Hintikka

Semantic Foundations for Deductive Methods

Aquinas' Third Way Modalized

Do we have knowledge of the external world?

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

Introduction to Philosophy

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

LOGIC LECTURE #3: DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION. Source: A Concise Introduction to Logic, 11 th Ed. (Patrick Hurley, 2012)

Illustrating Deduction. A Didactic Sequence for Secondary School

Russell on Descriptions

Aboutness and Justification

Chapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic)

Transcription:

Logic

Plato s Allegory of the Cave

The First Word of the Day is Troglodyte From the Greek word for cave (trōglē). The Troglodytae (Τρωγλοδῦται) or Troglodyti (literally cave goers ) are those who live in caves.

The Second Word of the Day is Allegory From the Greek allēgoria from allos (other) + agoria (speaking). An allegory is a story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning behind the literal meaning.

One representation of Plato s Cave

Overview: Logic Intro (1) Sentences and Statements and Propositions (2) Simple and Complex Statements (3) Necessary and Sufficient Conditions (4) An argument as a reason to believe. (5) Arguments vs Explanations (6) Enthymemes (7) Practice Exercises

What is Logic? The study of good arguments or good reasoning. The study of how we ought to reason (not how we do reason). A normative science (as opposed to a descriptive science). Logic was first formally studied by Aristotle (384-322 BCE). Sample Argument: All Athenians are Mortal. Aristotle is an Athenian. Therefore: Aristotle is Mortal.

Logic and Language

Sentences and Statements A sentence is a string of words that follows the rules of grammar. A statement is a sentence with a truth-value (a sentence that is either true or false). Statements are functionally informative, and typically have the form of assertions.

Statements and Propositions A statement is a sentence with a truth-value. A proposition is the meaning of the statement.

Sentences and Statements Sentence 1 I am sitting. [spoken by Steve Naragon at noon on June 3, 2016] 2 He is sitting. [spoken by another of Steve Naragon at noon on June 3, 2016] 3 I was sitting at noon. [spoken by Steve Naragon later that day] 4 I am sitting. [spoken by Alice Miller at noon on June 3, 2016] Statement Steve Naragon was sitting at noon on June 3, 2016. Steve Naragon was sitting at noon on June 3, 2016. Steve Naragon was sitting at noon on June 3, 2016. Alice Miller was sitting at noon on June 3, 2016.

Simple and Complex Statements

Some Complex Statements Conditional: If P, then Q If you mow my yard this afternoon, then I ll pay you $20. P Q Conjunction: P and Q Ed and Bob are Republicans. = Ed is a Republican and Bob is a Republican P Q Disjunction: P or Q Either that s a hedgehog climbing up your trousers or it s a porcupine. = A hedgehog is climbing up your trousers or a porcupine is climbing up your trousers. P Q

Necessary and Sufficient Conditions

NC and SC are Everywhere Conditional Statements: If P, then Q If Fido is a dog, then Fido is a mammal. P: Fido is a dog. Q: Fido is a mammal. Categorical Statements: All P are Q All dogs are mammals. P: dogs Q: mammals P is a sufficient condition of Q Q is a necessary condition of P empty dogs mammals P is sufficient for Q = P being true is enough for Q to be true. Q is necessary for P = P cannot be true unless Q is true.

SG Practice: Necessary and Sufficient Having a son is a of being a parent. Sufficient Condition Having four sides is a of being a square. Necessary Condition Being bald is a of being a professor. Neither necessary nor sufficient Being an unmarried man is a of being a bachelor. Both necessary and sufficient

SG Practice: Necessary and Sufficient Taking the exam is a of passing the exam. Necessary Condition Drinking that entire bottle of whisky at one sitting is a of becoming inebriated. Sufficient Condition Lighting a match is a of starting a fire. Sufficient Condition Being a mammal is a of being an otter. Necessary Condition

Identifying Arguments

Logic is about arguments.

Logic is about arguments. and An argument is a set of statements that support the truth of a further statement.

A Few Logic Terms Sentence: A string of words following the rules of grammar. Statement: A sentence with a truth-value. Proposition (or propositional content ): The meaning of the statement. Truth-Value: The property of being true or of being false. Argument: An attempt to prove the truth of some statement (the conclusion) by appealing to other statements already believed to be true (the premises). Inference: The relationship that ties the premises to the conclusion, suggesting that the conclusion is true because the premises are true. Fallacy: An argument that appears to support the conclusion, more than it actually does.

Sample Argument (1) If human beings consist entirely of matter, then none of their actions are free. (2) But human beings do consist entirely of matter. (3) Therefore none of their actions are free. Premise Premise Conclusion The premises, if true, give us a reason to believe that the conclusion is true.

Sample Argument (1) If human beings consist entirely of matter, then none of their actions are free. (2) But human beings do consist entirely of matter. (3) Therefore none of their actions are free. Premise Premise Conclusion The premises and conclusion do not include indicator -words and other particles.

In Summary Argument = premises + conclusion + inference Premises/conclusion are all statements, each expressing some proposition. A fallacy is an argument whose inference is weaker than it appears.

Identifying Arguments When individuals voluntarily abandon property, they forfeit any expectation of privacy in it that they might have had. Therefore, a warrantless search or seizure of abandoned property is not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. (Judge Stephanie Kulp Seymour, United States v. Jones)

Identifying Arguments (1) When individuals voluntarily abandon property, they forfeit any expectation of privacy in it that they might have had. Therefore, (2) a warrantless search or seizure of abandoned property is not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. (Judge Stephanie Kulp Seymour, United States v. Jones) (1) gives us reason to believe (2).

Identifying Arguments If Socrates is a student of nature, then he is an atheist. He is a student of nature. Therefore, he is an atheist. (Plato, Apology)

Identifying Arguments (1) If Socrates is a student of nature, then he is an atheist. (2) He is a student of nature. Therefore, (3) he is an atheist. (Plato, Apology) (1) and (2) give us reason to believe (3).

Indicator Words Conclusion Indicators therefore, wherefore, thus, consequently, hence, accordingly, entails that, for this reason, so, it follows that, as a result, suggests that, proves that, indicates that, is likely that, Premise Indicators since, because, given that, in that, as indicated by, for, owing to, inasmuch as, may be inferred from, in view of

Explanations (as backward arguments)

Arguments vs Explanations (1) John broke the window because he tripped. (2) John broke the window because he had forgotten his key and needed to get in. (3) John broke the window because he was the only person in the house. (Fisher, Logic of Real Arguments, p. 18)

Arguments vs Explanations (1) Explanandum: (John broke the window) Why did he do that? Because Explanans: (he tripped). (2) Explanandum: (John broke the window) Why did he do that? Because Explanans: (he forgot his key). (3) Conclusion: (John broke the window) Why should I believe that? Because Premise: (he was the only person in the house).

Enthymemes

Enthymemes #1 An enthymeme is any deductive argument that is missing either a premise or a conclusion, or sometimes both. For example: We cannot trust this man, for he has lied in the past.

Enthymemes #1 An enthymeme is any deductive argument that is missing either a premise or a conclusion, or sometimes both. For example: We cannot trust this man, for he has lied in the past. The complete argument would read: Those who have lied in the past cannot be trusted. This man has lied. Therefore, we cannot trust this man

Enthymemes #2 If you spend that much time playing video games, then you will not do well in college.

Enthymemes #2 If you spend that much time playing video games, then you will not do well in college. The complete argument could read: If you spend that much time playing video games, then you will not do well in college. You are spending that much time playing video games. Therefore, you will not do well in college.

Enthymemes #2 If you spend that much time playing video games, then you will not do well in college. The complete argument could read: If you spend that much time playing video games, then you will not do well in college. You are spending that much time playing video games. Therefore, you will not do well in college. Or, more hopefully, it might read: If you spend that much time playing video games, then you will not do well in college. You want to do well in college. Therefore, you ll spend less time playing video games.

Logic Review (1) Sentences and Statements and Propositions (2) Simple and Complex Statements (3) Necessary and Sufficient Conditions (4) Premises give a reason to believe the conclusion. (5) Arguments vs Explanations (6) Enthymemes

Practice

What s the Conclusion? (1/3) That bicycle must belong to Mary, since it s either John s or Mary s, and it s way too big for John.

What s the Conclusion? (1/3) (1) That bicycle must belong to Mary, since (2) it s either John s or Mary s, and (3) it s way too big for John. (2) and (3) give us reason to believe (1).

What s the Conclusion? (2/3) Belief by U.S. citizens in global warming dropped by 20%, even though the scientific data still unequivocally support the claim that global temperatures are rising. This suggests that public opinion is being swayed by something other than the facts.

What s the Conclusion? (2/3) (1) Believe by U.S. citizens in global warming dropped by 20%, even though (2) the scientific data still unequivocally support the claim that global temperatures are rising. This suggests that (3) public opinion is being swayed by something other than the facts. (1) and (2) give us reason to believe (3).

What s the Conclusion? (3/3) If Ed has black hair, then Ed is Italian, and Ed does indeed have black hair, so he must be Italian.

What s the Conclusion? (3/3) (1) If Ed has black hair, then Ed is Italian. (2) Ed does have black hair, so (3) Ed is Italian. (1) and (2) give us reason to believe (3).

What s Missing? (1/2) He s clearly not home, since his light is not on.

What s Missing? (1/2) (1) He s clearly not home, since (2) his light is not on. [and (3) If his light is not on, then he s not home] (2) and the missing premise (3) give us reason to believe (1).

What s Missing? (2/2) If I want pizza, then I ll order pizza, but I don t want pizza.

What s Missing? (2/2) (1) If I want pizza, then I ll order pizza, but (2) I don t want pizza. [Therefore (3) I won t order pizza.] (1) and (2) give us reason to believe the omitted conclusion (3).