question

Laws of Logic:

answer

Basic foundations of Logic, first principles. The foundation of all reasoning. If they are not accepted as true, then nothing we say or reason makes any sense. These laws are undiniable.

question

Laws of NonContradiction:

answer

Something cannot both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect.

question

The Law of Excluded Middle:

answer

Something either is or is not.

question

Law of Identity:

answer

something is what it is. P=p

question

Undeniable:

answer

The laws of logic are undeniable

question

Premises:

answer

Reasons.

question

Conclusion:

answer

Belief that one is trying to support.

question

Inference:

answer

The relationship between the premises and the conclusion.

question

Vadility:

answer

Refers to the structure of an argument; an argument is considered valid if the conclusion follows from the premisis, it is invalid if the conclusion does not follow (Non-Sequitur) (No sequence-It does not follow)

question

Non-sequitur

answer

No sequencing- it does not follow.

question

Truth Value:

answer

Refres to the quality of the propositions in the arugmuent; arguments are valid or invalid but propositions are true for false. -The truth value of teh propositions has nothing to do with the vadility of the argument, and vadility has nothing to do with the truth value of the proposition.

question

Sound:

answer

An argument is sound if it is both valid and the premises are true; an argument may be valid and unsound but can never be invalid and sound; an argument is unsound if it is either invalid or one or more of the premisis are false.

question

Deduction:

answer

form of logic made up of arguments where (if valid) the conclusion follows necesarily from, or is guaranteed by the premisis. -a valid deductive argument is one where, if we assume the premise are true, it is imposible for the conclusion to be false. -Deductive arguments often reason fromt he general to the particular.

question

Syllogism:

answer

The formal procedure for writing out a deductive argument.

question

The categorical Syllogism:

answer

a sylogism made up of categorial propositions. Ex: All LU students are attractive. All attractive persons are smart. All LU Students are smart.

question

Categorical proposition:

answer

A proposition that affirms or denies something in terms of two categories: subject and Predicate.

question

The disjunctive Syllogism:

answer

A syllogism made up of one disjunctive proposition as a premese, the denial of one of the alternates as the other premise, and the affirmation of the other alternate in the conclusion.

question

Disjunctive propositon:

answer

A propositon in which affirms or denies something in terms of two alternatives (Known as alternatives) in the form of an "either/or" statement. Ex: "Either it rained last night or I left the sprinkler running. It dit not rain. I left the sprinkler running. " - assuming that these either ors are true...

question

Alternate:

answer

...

question

Disjunctive fallacy:

answer

Affirming an alternate in the second premise instead of denying it. Ex: Either it rained or I left the sprinkler running. I left the sprinkler running. It did not rain. -This answer is not a necessary, its a maybe answer.

question

The Hypothetical Syllogism:

answer

A syllogism made up of two hypothetical propositions.

question

Hypothetical proposition:

answer

A conditional statement that affirms or denies something in terms of an antecedent** (Usually Expressed as "If") and a Consequent** (Usually expressed as "Then") Ex: if you do the work, then you will pass the course.

question

Antecedent:

answer

Usually expressed as an "if" in the begining

question

Consequent:

answer

Usually expressed as "then" at the end.

question

Pure Hypothetical Syllogism:

answer

The pure hypothetical syllogism uses only hypothetical propositions for the two premises and the conclusions. If you do the work, then you will pass teh course. If you pass the course, then you will graduate. ----------------------------------------- If you do the work then you will graduate. -There really isnt a fallacy for the Pure hypothetical Syllogism.

question

Mixed Hypothetical Syllogism:

answer

Employs a hypothetical proposition for the first premise but then uses categorical propositons for the second premise and the conclusion. There are two types of Mixed Hypothetical syllogism: 1. Modus Ponens 2. Modus Tolens

question

Modeus Pones:

answer

Means or meathods of affirming. Ex: If you do the work, you will pas the course. you did the work. you passed the course.

question

Modus Tolen:

answer

Means of denying the consequent. Ex: If you do the work, the you pass the course. You did not pass the course. You did not do the work.

question

Denying The Antecedent:

answer

If you do the work, then you will passs the course. you did not do the work. you did not pass the course.

question

Affirming the consequence:

answer

If you do the work, then you will pass the course. you passed the course. You did the work.

question

Rules of valid Inference:

answer

...

question

Induction:

answer

Logic made up of argument which can lean only to a probable conclusion, not a necessary one. No inductive argument can arrive at an absolutly certian conclusion (one that must be true) Inductive arguments usually gather toghether particular truths and arrive at general conclusions.

question

Method Of Generalization:

answer

The most common type of inductive argument, one gathers together identical patricular instances and arrives at some form of generalization. Ex: A large # of students are ____

question

Method Of Analogy:

answer

An argument from anallogy occurs when one observes relativley similar particulars, and attemps to arrive at a probable conclusion.

question

Probability Calculus:

answer

A form of inductive argumentation where one reasons on the basis of set rules in determining the likelyhood of something occuring given all possibilities variables.

question

Statistical Reasoning:

answer

An IA Based on the gathering of a sampole population and arriving at averages, percentages adn general trends.

question

Casual Inference:

answer

In Inductive Arguments that begins with an observe effect and reasons back to its cause. Ex: car wont start in the morning; the battery is prob dead.

question

Hypothetical Reasoning:

answer

Inductive reasoning that begins w/ a problem with an unknown explanation. A hypothesis is formulated and tested with the goal of explaining the problem.

question

Formal Fallicies:

answer

Errors which occur in the structure of an argument ie. breaking the rules of valid inferences in a deductive argument.

question

Informal Fallicies:

answer

Errors which occur within the content of an argument usually due to one of the four reasons: -It makes the argument inductively weak. -the language used is not clear in its meaning -the facts are not presented accuratley. -Irrelavent issues are introduces that have nothing to do with the argument.

question

Fallicies of WEak Induction:

answer

...

question

Hasty Generalization:

answer

Based a conclusion on an insufficent number of particulars. Ex: Women are so sentimental. My mother and my sister always cry at movies but my father and I never do.

question

Sweeping Generalization:

answer

Applying a generalization to a specific case to which the rule does not apply; treating a general principle as a hard and fast rule. Ex:Each person has a right to control what occurs to their own body. Therefore, a woman has a right to determine if a fetus can use her body or not.

question

False Analogy:

answer

Drawing an analogy between two things that re not similar in relavan areas. Ex:We should not be offended when we offend people with the gospel. After all, in order to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs.

question

Fasle Cause:

answer

Assuming a casual relation when there is little to no evidence of one. Ex: "I knew it would rain, It just washed my car." Ex: Every major war has occurred when a democrat was president. We should think twice before electing a democrat in the next presidential election.

question

Fallicies of Ambiguity:

answer

fallicies that occur because the language or terms useed are not clear in their meaning. -emotionally loaded terms can obscure the real issue: Homophobia Back ally Abortions

question

Hypostatization:

answer

Abstract terms are used concretely w/ out clarrification, usually through personification: "morality is culturally determened", "Death w/ Ddignety". Ex: believe the universe wants to be noticed. I think the universe is improbably biased toward the consciousness, that it rewards intelligence in part because the universe enjoys its elegance being observed. And who am I, living in the middle of history, to tell the universe that it-or my observation of it-is temporary? (from The Fault in our Stars)

question

Equivocation:

answer

Terms change their meaning in the middle of the argument: "a woman has a right** to have an abortion therefore it is right** for her to do so." Ex:I don't want that doctor to examine me because he is till practicing. I'll find someone who doesn't need to practice anymore.

question

Fallicies of Presumption:

answer

Fallicies that occur because presumptions are made in the presenation of facts and therefor the facts are not presented accuratly.

question

Begging the question:

answer

the main question or issue is not really addressed but is ignored or evaded. Ex: Husbands cheat on their wives because they are unhappy with them. We know this is true because if husbands were happy with their wives they wouldn't cheat on them.

question

Bifurication:

answer

Only two options are presented when other options are possible. Ex: Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of selfless acts for others or the darkness of absolute selfish acts only for oneself.

question

Special Pleading:

answer

An illegitamate double standard is applied that distorts the facts. -The most common method is the use of euphemistic and pesorative terms: "Grouping/Ganging" "Thrifty/Cheap" Ex: We should stock up on everything we need before the hoarders get her and take it all.

question

Fallicies of Irrelevancy:

answer

Irrelevant issues that have noting to do w/ the argument as raised as if they are relevant.

question

Ad Hominem:

answer

Attacing the perosn who is making the argument rather than the argument itslef. Ex: "He's a liberal, therefor his argument obvioulsy makes no sense." Ex: Of course the senator from Virginia argues against the cigarette tax. We all know where tobacco is grown, don't we? You should ignore his arguments.

question

Appeal to Pitty:

answer

"If you dont pass me I will not graduate, my parents will be upest and I wont get the job I was hoping for. Ex: You should let this student pass. He may not completely understand the material, but he has been up all night studying. If he doesn't pass, he won't graduate.

question

Ad Populum:

answer

appealing to the fact that a belief is popular or commonly believed as evidence for its truthfulness Ex: Most scholars reject the natural arguments for God's existence, therefore you should also

question

Fair Use of Evidence:

answer

Good arguments use evidence farily and avoid suppressing evidence in favor of a particualr position. -Need to take care not to allow biases to conceal or ignore evidence; Get out in the open and admit problems.

question

Positive/Negative Approach:

answer

Good arguments not only provide positive evidence for their own view, but also provide negative evidence for the opposing view.

question

Explanatory Power:

answer

when choosing between two views, the one that explains all the facts with the least amount of problems is the best to choose.

question

Explanatory scope:

answer

Considers the quality of facts accounted by our explanation.

question

Explanatory power:

answer

considers the quality of the explanation of the facts.

question

Plausibility:

answer

This ahs to do with the explanation fitting w/ our background knowledge.

question

Minmally Ad Hoc:

answer

The explanation whith the least amount of ad hoc details is considered the better one.

question

Principle of Parsimony:

answer

Ockm's Razor-"entities should not be multiplied w/ out necessity." Good arguments are those which do not contain a lot of unescessary assumptions or reasoning. Balance: avoid being simplistic in an effort to simplify.

question

Counterexample:

answer

...

question

Elements of a Good Argument:

answer

1. Good Reasoning 2. Clarity of thoughts and Language 3. Consistency and Coherencey 4. Comprehensive 5. Orderly Structure 6. Fair use of Evidence 7. Explanatory Power 8. Positive/Negative Approach 9. Principle of Parsimony

question

Hypothetical falllacies:

answer

Deny the antecedent in second premises: Ex: If you do the work, then you will pas the course. you did not do the work. ____________________________ you did not pass the course Affirming the consequence in the second premise: Ex: If you do the work, then you will pass the course. You passed the course __________________________ you did the work.

question

Deductive Fallacies:

answer

A fallacy is simply an error in logic. Deductive fallacies occur when one breaks on of the rules of valid inference.

Philosophy 201 – Flashcards

Unlock all answers in this set

Haven't found what you were looking for?

Search for samples, answers to your questions and flashcards