ARGUMENTS.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Deductive Validity In this tutorial you will learn how to determine whether deductive arguments are valid or invalid. Go to next slide.

Advertisements

1 Valid and Invalid arguments. 2 Definition of Argument Sequence of statements: Statement 1; Statement 2; Therefore, Statement 3. Statements 1 and 2 are.

Lecture 2: Deduction, Induction, Validity, Soundness.

Arguments, validity, soundness, persuasiveness

2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.

Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.

Deductive Validity In this tutorial you will learn how to determine whether deductive arguments are valid or invalid. Chapter 3.b.

2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.

PHIL 120: Jan 8 Basic notions of logic

Basic Argumentation.

Section 2 Logic.

Truth-Table Definition of Validity An argument is truth-table valid if it is impossible for the premises to all be True and the conclusion False. I.e.,

Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.

Warm Up 1. How do I know the following must be false? Points P, Q, and R are coplanar. They lie on plane m. They also lie on another plane, plane n. 2.

Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.

Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

2.8 Methods of Proof PHIL 012 1/26/2001.

Philosophy: Logic and Logical arguments

BBI 3420 Critical Reading and Thinking Critical Reading Strategies: Identifying Arguments.

Reasoning To understand and analyse how basic philosophical arguments work. Understand basic philosophical terms. Use the terms to identify key features.

Use and mention Logic is part of philosophy Logic is a word “Logic” is a word Use There’s glory for you. --what do you mean by “glory”? Mention.

Deductive and induction reasoning

Understanding the Persuasive Techniques in Developing Arguments How a speech can soothe and inspire a grieving population.

Arguments Arguments: premises provide grounds for the truth of the conclusion Two different ways a conclusion may be supported by premises. Deductive Arguments.

 Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.  You consider evidence you have seen or heard to draw a conclusion.

Deductive s. Inductive Reasoning

THE NATURE OF ARGUMENT. THE MAIN CONCERN OF LOGIC Basically in logic we deal with ARGUMENTS. Mainly we deal with learning of the principles with which.

Do now Can you make sure that you have finished your Venn diagrams from last lesson. Can you name 5 famous mathematicians (including one that is still.

Introduction to Philosophy Doing Philosophy: Arguments

PHIL102 SUM2014, M-F12:00-1:00, SAV 264 Instructor: Benjamin Hole

Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Deductive reasoning.

WEEK 3 VALIDITY OF ARGUMENTS Valid argument: A deductive argument is valid if its conclusion is necessarily and logically drawn from the premises. The.

Deductive Arguments.

Gettier and the analysis of knowledge

A Crash Course in Logic : Introduction to Philosophy

Chapter 3 Philosophy: Questions and theories

Evaluating truth tables

The Ontological Argument

Validity and Soundness

Introduction to Philosophy Spring 2009

Testing for Validity and Invalidity

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

The Ontological Argument

Inductive and Deductive Logic

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

Discrete Mathematics Lecture # 8.

Logic Problems and Questions

Premise: If it’s a school day, then I have Geometry class.

Deductive Arguments: Checking for Validity

Validity & Invalidity Valid arguments guarantee true conclusions but only when all of their premises are true Invalid arguments do not guarantee true conclusions.

Formalizing arguments

6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments

Critical Thinking Lecture 2 Arguments

Logical Fallacies.

8C Truth Tables, 8D, 8E Implications 8F Valid Arguments

“Still I Look to Find a Reason to Believe”

Phil2303 intro to logic.

SUMMARY Logic and Reasoning.

Evaluating Deductive Arguments

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

Validity and Soundness, Again

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

Presentation transcript:

ARGUMENTS

Lesson Aims: 1. Introduce the components of deductive arguments 2. Introduce the concept of formal validity 3. Introduce the concept of formal soundness

Deductive Arguments 2 fundamental components: Premises Conclusion * The premises of an argument support its conclusion.

“I don’t think I’ll be going out this weekend if there’s a chance of snow. And this morning the weather forecast called for snow. So it looks like I’ll be staying in this weekend.” FORMAL RESTATEMENT P1 If there is a chance of snow this weekend, then I will not go out. P2 There is a chance of snow this weekend. C I will not go out.

How do we identify the conclusion of an argument? “Clue” words: Thus So Therefore Hence Ergo

Find the Conclusion! “I believe that every batter on the Giants roster this year will have a batting average better than .250. And I believe that Posey will be a batter on the Giants roster this year, so I believe that Poseywill have a batting average better than .250.” C: Posey will have a batting average better than .250.

Validity A valid argument is an argument that preserves truth from its premises to its conclusion. This means that if the premises of the argument are true, then the conclusion must also be true. VALID: P1 George will say hello to every person who will come into the store today. P2 Bill is a person will come into the store today. C George will say hello to Bill. INVALID: P1 Every U.S. President lives in the White House. P2 Michelle Obama lives in the White House. C Michelle Obama is a U.S. President.

Valid or Invalid? P1 All men are mortal. P2 Socrates is mortal. C Socrates is a man. Invalid: The truth of the premises isn't enough to guarantee the truth of the conclusion. (We can imagine a state of affairs in which P1 and P2 are true, but C is false.)

Valid or Invalid? P1 Every good ballerina is an elegant dancer. P2 Arnold Schwarzenegger is a good ballerina. C Arnold Schwarzenegger is an elegant dancer. Valid: If the premises of this argument are true, then the conclusion must be true. But so what??? The premises of this argument aren't true!

Soundness A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. P1 Every major league baseball team has at least nine players. P2 The Milwaukee Brewers are a major league baseball team. C The Milwaukee Brewers have at least nine players. *When considering whether an argument is persuasive, we ultimately want to determine whether or not the argument is sound.

Sound or Not Sound? P1 All good cars are reliable P2 All Yugos are reliable C All good cars are Yugos Not sound: This argument is not formally valid.

Sound or Not Sound? P1 All reliable cars are good cars. P2 All Yugos are reliable cars. C All Yugos are good cars. Not sound: This argument is valid, but P2 is (presumably) false.

Sound or Not Sound? P1 Abortion involves the killing of an innocent person P2 It is never morally permissible to kill an innocent person C Abortion is never morally permissible Uncertain: To determine the soundness of this argument, we'd need to hear further arguments in favor of the individual premises. That's why arguments end up being so important in philosophy!

Review 1. The two fundamental components of a deductive argument are the premises and the conclusion. 2. An argument is valid if the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion. 3. An argument is sound if it is valid and its premises are all true.