III. Some Basic Concepts of Logic Clarity  Definition -- lexical and stipulative -- ostensive -- definition by examples -- definition by a synonym --

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
KEY TERMS Argument: A conclusion together with the premises that support it. Premise: A reason offered as support for another claim. Conclusion: A claim.
Advertisements

Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning
Deduction and Induction Elementary deduction, my dear Watson…
Arguments, validity, soundness, persuasiveness
1 Philosophy and Arguments. 2Outline 1 – Arguments: valid vs sound 2. Conditionals 3. Common Forms of Bad Arguments.
Today’s Outline Hume’s Problem of Induction Two Kinds of Skepticism
Logic and Reasoning Panther Prep North Central High School.
Other Info on Making Arguments
2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.
Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, Even further More and yet more, etc., ad infinitum, Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.
Logos Formal Logic.
 Monty Python – Argument Clinic video  Monty Python Monty Python.
René Descartes The father of modern Western philosophy and the epistemological turn Methodological doubt, his dreaming argument and the evil.
Science and induction  Science and we assume causation (cause and effect relationships)  For empiricists, all the evidence there is for empirical knowledge,
Basic Critical Thinking Skills Essentials of Clear Thinking: Claims and Issues.
BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARGUMENTS
1 Arguments in Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy.
DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
Basic Argumentation.
Persuasion Deductive reasoning works from the more general to the more specific. Sometimes this is informally called a "top-down" approach. Inductive reasoning.
Deduction, Induction, & Truth Kareem Khalifa Department of Philosophy Middlebury College.
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.
Logical Fallacies.
 Definitions and Disagreements, & Extension and Intention Modes of Definition, & Presupposition Disputes Week 11 and 12.
Basic Critical Thinking Skills Essentials of Clear Thinking: Claims and Issues.
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.
Curly Questions By Clarissa Suchanek. Do you think you can ever lie to yourself? I don’t think I could ever lie to myself because even if I was capable.
Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning. Deductive Reasoning Starts with a general rule (a premise) which we know to be true. Then, from that rule, we make.
Logic in Everyday Life.
Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.
Reasoning. Inductive and Deductive reasoning Inductive reasoning is concerned with reasoning from “specific instances to some general conclusion.” Deductive.
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.
The Philosopher’s Toolkit Write as a thinker, think as a writer.
READING #4 “DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS” By Robert FitzGibbons from Making educational decisions: an introduction to Philosophy of Education (New York & London:
HOW TO CRITIQUE AN ARGUMENT
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) All dogs have two heads. 2. All tigers are dogs. ___________________________________ 3. All tigers have two.
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from.
Philosophy: Logic and Logical arguments
Reasoning To understand and analyse how basic philosophical arguments work. Understand basic philosophical terms. Use the terms to identify key features.
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. PROBLEM SOLVING Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
Lecture 2 (Chapter 2) Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics.
Arguments Arguments: premises provide grounds for the truth of the conclusion Two different ways a conclusion may be supported by premises. Deductive Arguments.
Deductive Reasoning. Deductive reasoning The process of logical reasoning from general principles to specific instances based on the assumed truth of.
Deductive s. Inductive Reasoning
If then Therefore It is rainingthe ground is wet It is raining the ground is wet.
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.
Text Table of Contents #4: What are the Reasons?.
PHIL102 SUM2014, M-F12:00-1:00, SAV 264 Instructor: Benjamin Hole
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Deductive reasoning.
Chapter 3 Basic Logical Concepts (Please read book.)
A Crash Course in Logic : Introduction to Philosophy
Chapter 3 Philosophy: Questions and theories
Formulating a logical argument using Inductive and Deductive Reasoning
Logic, Philosophical Tools Quiz Review…20 minutes 10/31
Reasoning, Logic, and Position Statements
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Arguments.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Inductive and Deductive Logic
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Critical Thinking Lecture 2 Arguments
Logical Fallacies.
Phil2303 intro to logic.
Propositional Logic 1) Introduction Copyright 2008, Scott Gray.
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
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:

III. Some Basic Concepts of Logic Clarity  Definition -- lexical and stipulative -- ostensive -- definition by examples -- definition by a synonym -- genus and differentia genus = species differentia – has to be essential features. Examples  A mosque is a building, often with high towers and domes, where Muslims go to worship mosque  Yellow is a color that resembles a ripe lemon.  Yellow is the portion of the spectrum between green and orange.  Yellow is radiant energy with a wavelength of 580 nanometers.

 Extension (denotation) and intension (connotation) The extension of “chair” is this chair, that chair, … all the chairs that the word refers to. The intension of the word "chair" is (something like) "a piece of furniture designed to be sat upon by one person at a time." The intension of the word "chair" is (something like) "a piece of furniture designed to be sat upon by one person at a time." -- Thin and thick. – this chair, four-legged chair, furniture, physical object, thing, being. -- Thin and thick. – this chair, four-legged chair, furniture, physical object, thing, being. -- Related to universalism vs. holism. -- Related to universalism vs. holism.

Arguments and Validity  Arguments - not verbal fighting - not verbal fighting - basic structure - basic structure P premises P premises C conclusion C conclusion e.g. "I think she's in law school; she's always lugging around a pile of law books." - Sometimes the conclusion or some premises are omitted. - Sometimes the conclusion or some premises are omitted.

 Deductive Arguments and Validity - A (deductive) argument is valid if and only if it is impossible that simultaneously (a) all its premises are true and (b) its conclusion is false. - A (deductive) argument is valid if and only if it is impossible that simultaneously (a) all its premises are true and (b) its conclusion is false. - Not to be confused with truth value. - Not to be confused with truth value. - Propositions (e.g. premises and conclusions of arguments) are true or false. - Propositions (e.g. premises and conclusions of arguments) are true or false. - Arguments are never true or false; they can however be valid or invalid. - Arguments are never true or false; they can however be valid or invalid. - Many invalid arguments have true conclusions. - Many invalid arguments have true conclusions. Example: Some human beings are mortal, and Socrates is a human being. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (Can you see why this is an invalid argument?) Example: Some human beings are mortal, and Socrates is a human being. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (Can you see why this is an invalid argument?) - Many valid arguments have false conclusions. - Many valid arguments have false conclusions. Example: No human beings will ever die, and Socrates is a human being. Therefore, Socrates will never die. Example: No human beings will ever die, and Socrates is a human being. Therefore, Socrates will never die. - Every valid argument with a false conclusion has at least one false premise. - Every valid argument with a false conclusion has at least one false premise.

 Exercises P1 All bananas are purple. P2 All lettuce is orange. C All bananas and lettuce are either purple or orange. P1 All bananas are purple. P2 All lettuce is orange. C All bananas and lettuce are either purple or orange. P1 The Bible says God exists. C God exists. P1 The Bible says God exists. C God exists. P1 The Bible is the word of God. P2 The word of God is always true. P3 The Bible says that God exists. C God exists. P1 The Bible is the word of God. P2 The word of God is always true. P3 The Bible says that God exists. C God exists. P1 My parents have taught me that God does not exist. P2 Mom wouldn't lie. C God does not exist. P1 My parents have taught me that God does not exist. P2 Mom wouldn't lie. C God does not exist. War is the only way of stopping Saddam Hussein. After all, sanctions haven’t worked at all. War is the only way of stopping Saddam Hussein. After all, sanctions haven’t worked at all. Undemocratic societies kill the human spirit. The reason is clear: unless the people have the power in their society, the human spirit withers. Undemocratic societies kill the human spirit. The reason is clear: unless the people have the power in their society, the human spirit withers.

 Inductive reasoning Induction is a form of reasoning that makes generalizations based on individual instances. Induction is a form of reasoning that makes generalizations based on individual instances. P1 In the past, when I've gone home, my house has still been there. C When I go back home this afternoon, my house will still be there. P1 In the past, when I've gone home, my house has still been there. C When I go back home this afternoon, my house will still be there. P Every day to date the law of gravity has held. C. Therefore: The law of gravity will hold tomorrow. P Every day to date the law of gravity has held. C. Therefore: The law of gravity will hold tomorrow. - Statistic reasoning - Statistic reasoning e.g. This year x number of people will die in auto accidents in HK. e.g. This year x number of people will die in auto accidents in HK. - Causal reasoning - Causal reasoning e.g. Two weeks after they put fluoride in St. John’s water I got sick. I had a fever and couldn’t keep solid food down. So, I switched to drinking bottled water and I recovered in a day or so. That fluoridated water is dangerous stuff. e.g. Two weeks after they put fluoride in St. John’s water I got sick. I had a fever and couldn’t keep solid food down. So, I switched to drinking bottled water and I recovered in a day or so. That fluoridated water is dangerous stuff. - Arguments from Analogy - Arguments from Analogy e.g. Children are like flower, they need tender loving care. e.g. Children are like flower, they need tender loving care. - Arguments from authority - Arguments from authority

 Daily One-minute Paper 1. What is the big point you learned in class today? 1. What is the big point you learned in class today? 2. What is the main, unanswered question you leave class with today? 2. What is the main, unanswered question you leave class with today?