Philosophy 120 Symbolic Logic I H. Hamner Hill CSTL-CLA.SEMO.EDU/HHILL/PL120.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Computing Truth Value.
Advertisements

Truth Tables The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to construct truth tables and use them to test the validity of arguments. Go To Next Slide.
Logic & Critical Reasoning
Chapter 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Fall 2007 Dr. Robert Barnard.
Today’s Topics n Review of Grouping and Statement Forms n Truth Functions and Truth Tables n Uses for Truth Tables n Truth Tables and Validity.
Today’s Topics n Review Logical Implication & Truth Table Tests for Validity n Truth Value Analysis n Short Form Validity Tests n Consistency and validity.
For Friday, read chapter 2, sections 1-2 (pp ). As nongraded homework, do the problems on p. 19. Graded homework #1 is due at the beginning of class.
So far we have learned about:
Proving the implications of the truth functional notions  How to prove claims that are the implications of the truth functional notions  Remember that.
BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARGUMENTS
EE1J2 – Discrete Maths Lecture 5 Analysis of arguments (continued) More example proofs Formalisation of arguments in natural language Proof by contradiction.
Today’s Topics Using CP and RAA Things to watch for, things to avoid Strategic hints for using CP and RAA A Little Metalogic and some History of Logic.
Computability Thank you for staying close to me!! Learning and thinking More algorithms... computability.
Discrete Mathematics and its Applications
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Essay Writing in Philosophy
WARM UP EXERCSE Consider the right triangle below with M the midpoint of the hypotenuse. Is MA = MC? Why or why not? MC B A 1.
1 Introduction to Logic Programming. 2 Human Logic Humans are information processors, We acquire information about the world and use this information.
Chapter 1: Lecture Notes What Is an Argument? (and What is Not?)
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 4 ELEMENTARY NUMBER THEORY AND METHODS OF PROOF ELEMENTARY NUMBER THEORY AND METHODS OF PROOF.
Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.
How to do a Proof Using Uno!. What does it mean to prove something? PROOF (pruf) –noun 1. evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce.
Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning Consider the following two passages: Argument #1 Mr. Jones is a member of the Academy of Scholarly Fellows and only.
Introduction to Geometric Proof Logical Reasoning and Conditional Statements.
Chapter 10 Evaluating Premises: Self-Evidence, Consistency, Indirect Proof Invitation to Critical Thinking First Canadian.
Chapter 1 Logic Section 1-1 Statements Open your book to page 1 and read the section titled “To the Student” Now turn to page 3 where we will read the.
1 Sections 1.5 & 3.1 Methods of Proof / Proof Strategy.
CMPF144 FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPUTING THEORY Module 5: Classical Logic.
Advanced Topics in Propositional Logic Chapter 17 Language, Proof and Logic.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 5 The Ontological Argument By David Kelsey.
HAWKES LEARNING Students Count. Success Matters. Copyright © 2015 by Hawkes Learning/Quant Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Section 1.1 Thinking Mathematically.
Copyright © Curt Hill Mathematical Logic An Introduction.
Course Overview and Road Map Computability and Logic.
MATH 224 – Discrete Mathematics
2.8 Methods of Proof PHIL 012 1/26/2001.
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Proofs Rules of Inference Rules of Equivalence.
Chapter Five Conditional and Indirect Proofs. 1. Conditional Proofs A conditional proof is a proof in which we assume the truth of one of the premises.
PHIL/RS 335 God’s Existence Pt. 1: The Ontological Argument.
RECOGNIZING, ANALYZING, AND CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENTS
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science.
Proof By Contradiction Chapter 3 Indirect Argument Contradiction Theorems and pg. 171.
Methods of Proof for Boolean Logic Chapter 5 Language, Proof and Logic.
Ethics 160 Moral Arguments. Reasons and Arguments Different claims have different uses in our language. Sometimes, a claim or claims are used as a reason.
Sentence (syntactically Independent grammatical unit) QuestionCommandStatement “This is a class in logic.” “I enjoy logic.” “Today is Friday.”
Philosophy and Logic The Process of Correct Reasoning.
Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 10
I think therefore I am - Rene Descartes. REASON (logic) It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence.
© 2009 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.1 Chapters1 & 2.
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics Chapter 1 By Dr. Dalia M. Gil, Ph.D.
Section 1.7. Section Summary Mathematical Proofs Forms of Theorems Direct Proofs Indirect Proofs Proof of the Contrapositive Proof by Contradiction.
Chapter 1 Logic and proofs
Part One: Assessing the Inference, Deductive and Inductive Reasoning.
Chapter 7. Propositional and Predicate Logic
Deductive reasoning.
Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science
Chapter 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proof, Sets, and Functions
Truth Tables Hurley
Logic, Philosophical Tools Quiz Review…20 minutes 10/31
Truth Trees.
Titanic Unit Vocabulary
Computer Security: Art and Science, 2nd Edition
The Logic of Declarative Statements
Honors Geometry Intro to Proof.
Evaluating Deductive Arguments
Introducing Natural Deduction
Validity and Soundness, Again
Presentation transcript:

Philosophy 120 Symbolic Logic I H. Hamner Hill CSTL-CLA.SEMO.EDU/HHILL/PL120

Logic is the science of arguments Separate good arguments from bad ones Identify the characteristics of good arguments (validity and soundness) Produce good arguments of our own

Student Objectives learn the vocabulary of logic master methods and principles explain important concepts in logic improve communication skills symbolize arguments using logical notation test arguments for validity evaluate reasoning using the tools of logic

Requirements 3 in class examinations 10 routine graded homework assignments a comprehensive final examination

Cell Phones Turn it off. We are in class, your call can wait. Do not text message during class. Cell phones and logic do not mix. Hang up and derive! Read this column from the New York Times.this column

Textbook and Associated Computer Program The Power of Logic, 5 th edition, available at the Textbook Services.

Logic is the science of arguments All rational inquiry turns on the ideal of a logical consequence, the idea that some claim must necessarily follow from others. Arguments are designed to show that one claim logically follows from others. Logic allows to determine whether the arguments succeed.

What is an argument? An argument is not a disagreement or a form of verbal battle. An argument is a set of statements, one of which (the conclusion) is supposed to follow from the others (the premises).

Statement A sentence that has a truth value, i.e., a sentence that is either true or false (but never both). Statements are true when what they assert about the world is the case. Can you think of a sentence that is not a statement?

Can you think of a sentence that is not a a statement? OK, this is the sort of question logicians love to ask, because the question itself is a legitimate answer! The sentence “Can you think of a sentence that is not a statement?” is itself a sentence that is not a statement. Questions are neither true nor false. Commands, exclamations, and exhortations (Let’s...) are other sentences that do not express statements.

Types of statements Simple--A simple statement asserts exactly one fact about the world Compound--A compound statement is one or more simple statements plus logical connectives. 5 logical connectives: not, and, or, if- then, if and only if

NOTE: TRUTH is a property of statements. VALIDITY is a property of arguments

Conclusion A statement one is urged to accept on the basis of reasons given.

Premise A statement given as a reason for believing some other statement.

Identifying premises and the conclusion Correctly identifying the premises and conclusion of an argument are essential if we are to evaluate it. English uses many discrete premise and conclusion indicators (review your handout) that serve as guideposts in arguments.

Deductive Validity A characteristic of arguments in which the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. It is impossible for both the premises of a valid argument to be true and the conclusion to be false. Any argument that is not valid is invalid or non-valid

Validity does NOT guarantee the truth of the conclusion It is possible for the conclusion of a valid argument to be false. If this is the case, then at least one premise must be false.

The following argument is VALID: All trout are mammals All mammals have wings SO, all trout have wings This argument is valid because IF the premises are true THEN the conclusion MUST be true. This holds even though the premises are in fact false.

Soundness A characteristic of valid arguments whose premises are in fact true. It is impossible for the conclusion of a sound argument to be false. It is irrational to reject the conclusion of an argument one admits to be sound.

Logical Form and Grammatical Form Logic is not a matter of grammar. “Following logically’ is not a matter of grammatical placement.

Logic is a matter of form Logic is a formal discipline. It is concerned with the formal or structural properties (patterns) and relations in statements and arguments.

Argument Forms An argument form is a pattern of argument, the logical structure of an argument. Argument forms are either valid or non-valid. Valid arguments have valid argument forms.

Consistency Consistency is a property of sets of statements A set of statements is consistent if, but only if, it is possible for all of the statements in the set to be true. A set of statements is inconsistent if, but only if, it is impossible for all of the statements in the set to be true.

Consistency and Validity We can use the concept of consistency to test an argument for validity. How? Suppose I gave you a consistency checking machine (a machine that tests a set of statements for consistency). How could you use that machine to determine whether an argument is valid?

Hamner’s Helpful Home Consistency Checker Input Output (set of statements) (verdict) Consistent Not Consistent

Using the Consistency Checker Negate the conclusion of the argument and then ask whether the set of statements consisting of the premises and the negation of the conclusion is consistent. If yes, then the argument is NON-VALID. If no, if that set is inconsistent, then the argument is VALID.

Historical Significance Indirect Proof (Reductio ad Absurdum) Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometry Lobachevsky Reimann

Indirect Proof Both Lobachevsky and Reimann tried to establish the truth of all 5 of the core postulates of Euclidian geometry using indirect proof. They succeeded in proving 4 out of 5, but efforts to prove the parallel postulate by indirect proof never led to a contradiction. In fact, the failure to prove the parallel postulate led to the development of Non-Euclidian geometry.

Logic and Psychology Contexts of DISCOVERY and contexts of JUSTIFICATION are different. LOGIC is concerned with the context of justification, the business of defending beliefs. The "logic" of discovery is a matter for the discipline of psychology.

Justification and Discovery Ramanujan and the difference between justification and discovery.

Justification and Discovery Ramanujan was one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20 th Century. Today’s mathematicians are still trying to prove some of his theorems. He insisted that his ideas came to him in dreams, presented by the Goddess Namakaal. Even if this is true, it doesn’t concern the logician. Logicians are interested in the justification of the theorems (How they are proved), not how the are discovered.

Arguments are often confused with explanations Sometimes the language of arguments is used when one is not arguing for a conclusion but rather trying to explain a phenomenon.

Arguments: Answer the question "Why should I believe this?“ Give reasons for believing that something is the case.

Explanations: Answer the question "Why is this the case?“ Give an account of something already believed to be the case (the facts are not in dispute).

Key Ideas Definition of “argument” Validity is a matter of form Validity does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion Consistency as a test for validity Contexts of discovery and justification Arguments and explanations