1. Logic & Logical Fallacies

2. Session Schedule Session # Date / Time Session Name Brief Description1
Jan 24th – Sunday
2:00pm to 4:00pm
General Concepts & History of Philosophy
Understand what are the various belief systems. Historical Review of how Philosophy evolved 2
Jan 31stth – Sunday
General Philosophy an Introduction
General Introduction into what is the branch of Philosophy and then specifically review religious philosophy 3
Feb 7th – Sunday
Philosophy of Religion
How philosophy is handled and presented in the various MAJOR religions – Abrahaministic & Eastern 4
Feb 14th – Sunday
Logic & Logical Fallacies
Understanding Logic and understanding how to identify fallacies in arguments 5
Feb 21st – Sunday
Arguments for the Existence of God
Theological arguments; Ontological Arguments and Teleological Arguments for the Existence of God 6
Feb 28th – Sunday
Philosophical issues with existence of God
Philosophical issues with existence – Boeing 747 Gambit; Russell’s TeaPot; Morality etc. 7
March 7th - Sunday
Free Will and Theodicy
The problem of Free Will with respect to Omnipotence; Omniscience and Omni benevolence.
Problem with Evil 8
March 14th – Sunday
Putting it all together
Summarizing key concepts

3. What is Logic The practice of VALID Reasoning
the study of the principles and criteria of valid inference and demonstration. It attempts to distinguish good reasoning from bad reasoning.
 It deals only with propositions (declarative sentences, used to make an assertion, as opposed to questions, commands or sentences expressing wishes) that are capable of being true or false. 
Logic does not cover the psychological processes or motivations behind propositions. It does however cover items such as Fallacies and Paradoxes

4. Brief History of Logic
In Ancient India, the "Nasadiya Sukta" of the Rig Veda contains various logical divisions that were later recast formally as the four circles of catuskoti: "A", "not A", "A and not A" and "not A and not not A".
The Nyaya school of Indian philosophical speculation is based on texts known as the "Nyaya Sutras" of Aksapada Gautama from around the 2nd Century B.C., and its methodology of inference is based on a system of logic.
But modern logic descends mainly from the Ancient Greek tradition. Both Plato and Aristotle conceived of logic as the study of argument and from a concern with correctness -of argumentation. 
Aristotle produced six works on logic, known collectively as the "Organon", the first of these, the "Prior Analytics", being the first explicit work in formal logic.
Aristotle espoused two principles of great importance in logic, the Law of Excluded Middle (that every statement is either true or false) and the Law of Non-Contradiction (confusingly, also known as the Law of Contradiction, that no statement is both true and false). He is perhaps most famous for introducing the syllogism (or term logic).
Source -

5. Brief History of Logic
In medieval times, Aristotelian logic (or dialectics) was studied, along with grammar and rhetoric, as one of the three main strands of the trivium, the foundation of a medieval liberal arts education.
Logic in Islamic philosophy also contributed to the development of modern logic, especially the development of Avicennian logic(which was responsible for the introduction of the hypothetical syllogism, temporal logic, modal logic and inductive logic) as an alternative to Aristotelian logic.
In the 18th Century, Immanuel Kant argued that logic should be conceived as the science of judgment, so that the valid inferences of logic follow from the structural features of judgments, although he still maintained that Aristotle had essentially said everything there was to say about logic as a discipline.
In the 20th Century, however, the work of Gottlob Frege, Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell on Symbolic Logic, turned Kant's assertion on its head. This new logic, expounded in their joint work "Principia Mathematica", is much broader in scope than Aristotelian logic, and even contains classical logic within it, albeit as a minor part. It resembles a mathematical calculus and deals with the relations of symbols to each other.
Source -

6. Types of Logic Logic in general can be divided into four categories:
Formal Logic: Formal Logic is what we think of as traditional logic or philosophical logic, namely the study of inference with purely formal and explicit content
Informal Logic: Studies natural language arguments. focuses on the reasoning and argument one finds in personal exchange, advertising, political debate, legal argument,
Symbolic Logic is the study of symbolic abstractions that capture the formal features of logical inference. It deals with the relations of symbols to each other, often using complex mathematical calculus
Mathematical Logic: Both the application of the techniques of formal logic to mathematics and mathematical reasoning, and, conversely, the application of mathematical techniques to the representation and analysis of formal logic.

7. Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning
Deductive Reasoning is when a inference is gathered from a premise . An argument is considered valid if it follows from it’s premises. Typically use Syllogism:
Example: Where given A and IF A then B then B must be concluded - Major Premise; Minor Premise and Conclusion
Example: Major premise: All humans are mortal.
Minor premise: All Greeks are humans.
Conclusion: All Greeks are mortal.
Inductive Reasoning is when the premise mostly supports the conclusion. In the case of deductive reasoning the conclusion is certain in Inductive reasoning the conclusion is “probable”
Example: 90% of biological life forms that we know of depend on liquid water to exist. Therefore, if we discover a new biological life form it will probably depend on liquid water to exist.

8. LOGICAL FALLACIES

9. Examples of Fallacies Inductive Argument
Premise 1: Most American cats are domestic house cats.  Premise 2: Bill is an American cat.  Conclusion: Bill is domestic house cat.
Factual Error
Columbus is the capital of the United States.
Deductive Fallacy
Premise 1: If Portland is the capital of Maine, then it is in Maine.  Premise 2: Portland is in Maine.  Conclusion: Portland is the capital of Maine.  (Portland is in Maine, but Augusta is the capital. Portland is the largest city in Maine, though.)
Inductive Fallacy
Premise 1: Having just arrived in Ohio, I saw a white squirrel.  Conclusion: All Ohio Squirrels are white.  (While there are many, many squirrels in Ohio, the white ones are very rare).
Reference -

10. What is a Logical Fallacy
A logical fallacy is any sort of mistake in reasoning or inference, or, essentially, anything that causes an argument to go wrong.
Major Types of Logical Fallacies:

11. Why is this Important
We get BOMBARDED BY information from various media sources. It is critical to understand logical premise when assimilating and analyzing information.
Most fallacies are found in the following areas:
Politics
Religion
Scientific Understanding – Climate Change; Evolution etc.
Public Policy
Law and Social Sciences

12. Group Exercise – Spot the Fallacy

13. In Politics Question-1: URL - https://youtu.be/C2j2X27FXh0 Ad Hominum
False Cause
Slippery Slope
Begging the Question
Question-2: URL -
Strawman
Tu Quoque
Question -3: Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney demonstrated this one when he said, "Now we have more chronic long-term unemployment than this country has ever seen before, twenty million people out of work, stopped looking for work, or in part-time jobs that need full-time jobs, we've got housing prices continuing to decline, and we have foreclosures at record levels. This president has failed." He is saying that the president's previous actions are responsible for all these bad things happening today. (False Analogy)
Slippery Slode
False Analogy/False Cause

14. In Policy "Racism is wrong. Therefore, we need affirmative action.“
If we allow gays to marry, then the next thing you know people will be marrying their dogs. Or horses. 
a) False Cause b) Slippery Slope c) Red Herring d) Non Sequitor
you can't believe that President Obama is going to lower taxes. He's a pathological liar!
a) Red Herring b) Ad Hominum c) Either Or Reasoning d) A Priori Argument
“Sure, we haven’t given raises in over five years to our employees. You know, we work really hard to make a good product. We try to ensure the best customer service, too.” – Red Herring
a) Red Herring b) Argument from Consequence c) Slippery Slope d) Appeal to Closure
“I have worked hard to help eliminate criminal activity. What we need is economic growth that can only come from the hands of leadership.”
"Racism is wrong. Therefore, we need affirmative action.“
a) Bandwagon b) Begging the Question/Circular c) False Analogy d) Non Sequitor

15. Group Exercise – 2

16. In Religion
1- The <HOLY BOOK> is the word of god because it says it is, And it can't be wrong, because after all, It is the word of god
a) Circular Logic b) Either Or Reasoning c) Bandwagon
2 - Edward claimed to be an astrologer and psychic, but when his 'abilities' were tested under proper scientific conditions, they magically disappeared. Edward explained this saying that one had to have faith in his abilities for them to work
a) Begging the Question b)Special Pleading (appeal to heaven) c) Argument from Motives d) Overgeneralization
3 - How many people believe in religion they cant all be wrong –
a) False Cause b) Argument by Pleading c) Non Sequitur d) Bandwagon
4 - the bible contains moral laws (premise) and that therefore, a person who doesn’t follow the bible is immoral (conclusion)
a) Non Sequitur b) Circular Logic c) False Analogy d) Slippery Slope

17. In Religion
EXAMPLE - 4
1) Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence.
2) If the universe has an explanation for its existence, that explanation is God.
3) The universe exists.
4) Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence.
5) Therefore, the explanation of the universe’s existence is God”.
Is the above a VALID ARGUMENT?
(argument from false premise)
Loot at # 2 – Argument from False Premise
EXAMPLE-5
“Atheism is false because it does not provide us with any consolation or a framework of morality” – Appeal/Argument to consequences
False Cause
Non Sequitur
Ad hominum
Appeal/Argument from Consequences

18. Group Exercise – 3

19. Personal Beliefs from Religion
Examine the following propositions:
I/We perform <<Insert religious ceremony>>. We do so because __________________
Examine the above statement to see if there are any logical fallacies
b) Does Morality have to be prescribed by a Creator? i.e. do you need a God or Creator to set a list of moral laws
Examine the above statement to see if there are any fallacies
c) I am interested in religious philosophy – example in Hinduism I am interested in understanding the Vedic definition of Brahman and Atman – When trying to understand this would your point of view be from WITHIN religion or point of view be on the merit of the philosophical concept?
Examine this statement to see if you may be exposed to any fallacies?