DOC PREVIEW
LIBERTY PHIL 201 - Study_Guide_Lesson_4

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 5 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

PHIL 201STUDY GUIDE: LESSON 4A Little LogicLesson OverviewLogic is the primary tool or methodology in studying philosophy. Philosophy is about analyzing and constructing arguments and a good understanding of the basics of logical reasoning is essential in performing that task. The next 3 lessons will focus on logic and analyzing arguments.In this lesson, you will first be introduced to the laws of logic. These are the first principles for all reasoning. We will then discuss the specialized terminology we use in logic. Finally, we will examine 2 major kinds of logical reasoning: deductive and inductive. We will consider different forms of arguments under each and discuss how to evaluate these arguments. Take note that a large part of this lesson is about learning the terminology for logic.TasksRead and take notes from Prelude to Philosophy, Chapter 5: “A Little Logic.” As you read, makesure you understand the following points and questions:1. Why are the laws of logic foundational? They make discourse possible; if they are not true then nothing we claim will make sense2. List and explain the 3 laws of logic. 1. Law of Non-contradiction (Most important)-Something cannot be true and false at the same time2. The law of excluded middle (Pv~P)-something either is or is not-excludes the possibility of something in the middle of existence and non-existence3. The law of Identity (P=P)-something is what it is (ex. Clark Kent and Superman)3. Know the symbolic expression of the law of non-contradiction and how it clears up confusions. ~(P*~P).----the ~ means 'not' and negates terms that follow it----'P' variable referring to term or proposition----'*' means 'and'It reads "It is not the case that there can be both P and non-PPv~P----'V' called a wedge means "either"4. Explain the common confusion concerning God and contradictions.----Matthew 19:26: with people this is impossible but with god all things are possible----the context of the passage is salvation----all things that are possible with God are possible, some things are not possible5. Know the symbolic expression of the Law of Excluded Middle. Why is it called the Law of Excluded Middle? It excludes the possibility of something in the middle of existence and nonexistence (it either exists or it doesn't)6. Know the why the laws of logic are self-evident. They prove themselves and do not need any proof outside of themselvesPage 1 of 5PHIL 2017. Know the three parts of an argument. An argument is a group of propositions called Premises trying to prove one another called propositions or conclusionsAn inference is the relationship between the premises and the conclusion8. Distinguish the language of evaluating arguments (deductive and inductive) from how weevaluate propositions.---deductive arguments are either valid or invalid---inductive arguments are either strong or weak---If conclusion follows the premises then it is either valid (if deductive) or strong (if inductive)9. Explain the relationship between truth value of the propositions with the validity/strength of the argument. The truth value of the propositions in an argument has nothing to do with its validity or strength, and validity and strength have nothing to do with the truth value10. Know the point about agreeing with the conclusion of an argument and it being a good argument. If the conclusion does not follow, the argument is invalid11. Know the kind of conclusion arrived at by a valid deductive argument. If the premise are assumed to be true, then the conclusion follows. (if all cows are purple, and if all purple animals jump over the moon, then it would have to be the case that all cows jump over the moon)12. Note the difference in terminology between the laws of logic and the rules of valid inference.13. Explain the categorical syllogism (you did not need to memorize the chart nor the 6 rules of valid inference). ---consists of two categorical propositions as the premises and one categorical proposition as the conclusion----a categorical proposition is a statement that affirms or denies a relationship between two categories or classes: a subject and predicate14. Explain the disjunctive syllogism and know the fallacy. ----makes use of disjunctive propositions----disjunctive proposition is an either/or statement that affirms or denies something in terms of two alternatives called alternates-----1 rule: one must deny one of the alternatives in the second premise and affirm the other alternative in the conclusion----fallacy of affirming alternate: when there are two possibilities and they can both be true15. Explain what a hypothetical proposition is doing and what it is not doing. ---affirms or denies something in terms of 'antecedent' and expressed as an 'if' and a consequent expressed as a 'then'----it states the sufficient condition for passing the course---it doesn't state the necessary condition16. Explain the hypothetical syllogism and know the two fallacies.--syllogism employs the hypothetical proposition--2 kinds:---pure: uses only hypothetical for 2 premise and conclusion---mixed: uses hypothetical propositions for 1st premise but then uses categorical prop. for 2nd premise and conclusionPage 2 of 5PHIL 201---2 forms---modus ponens (the way of affirming)--2nd premise affirms that the antecedent of the hypothetical is true---modus tollens (the way of denying)----the 2nd premise denies the consequent of the hypothetical proposition17. Contrast induction with deduction.--Deductive- it is impossible for the conclusion to be false and only has 2 possible evolutions: arguments are either valid or invalid--Inductive- only probably follows the premise, never follows necessarily as deduction--Strong inductive- assuming premise are true, conclusion will probably follow--Weak inductive- premise are true, conclusion will probably not follow18. How are inductive arguments evaluated in comparison to deductive arguments and what makes an argument stronger or weaker? --The conclusion for a strong argument can be extremely probable, very probable, somewhat probable, or little probable. Same degrees possible for weak arguments---Arguments that have either a great deal of evidence or evidence of higher quality will be stronger than those who don't.19. Explain the 6 forms of inductive arguments.-generalization--# of participants are gathered and a general conclusion attained-analogy--1 to 1 comparison between 2 or more things--relevantly similarity-predictions based on the


View Full Document

LIBERTY PHIL 201 - Study_Guide_Lesson_4

Download Study_Guide_Lesson_4
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Study_Guide_Lesson_4 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Study_Guide_Lesson_4 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?