• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/29

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

29 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Argument
Set of statements with premises which affirm the conclusion
logic
study of methods for evaluating whether the premises support the conclusion of an argument
Valid argument
it is necessary that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true--conclusion must be true, premises arent "important"
invalid argument
not necessary that if the premises are true, the conclusion is true
sound argument
valid, and all the premises are true
unsound argument
either is invalid, or has a false premise
deductive logic
part of logic that concerns tests for validity and invalidity
induction
reasoning from the past, has no logical guarantee
abduction
reasoning the the best explanation
problification
a list of statements makes something very probable
statement
sentence that has a true/false value, no questions or commands
indexicals
here, there, now, him
discount
not sure, although, in spite of
repition
could help doubting, but logically unnecessary
assurance
obscures the logic, "it's obvious that"
Meta-argument
doesnt use premises, rather uses clever language to get reader to accept conclusion
argument from authority
relies on an expert and uses their status to try and prove your point
argument from analogy
comparing 2 things and justifying something through their similarities
cogent
strong argument with all premises being true
strong argument
it is probable that if the premises are true, the conclusion also is true
uncogent
argument that is either weak or strong with a false premise
inductive logic tests what?
strength and weakness
Modus Ponens
If A, then B.
A.
So, B
Modus Tollens
If A, then B.
Not B.
So, Not A
Fallacy of Denying the Antecedent
If A, then B.
Not A.
So, Not B
Fallacy of affirming the consequent
If A, then B.
B.
So, A
Hypothetical Syllogism
If A, then B.
If B, then C.
So, If A, then C
Disjunctive Syllogism
Either A or B.
Not A.
So B.
Constructive Dilemma
Either A or B.
If A, then C.
If B, then D.
So, Either C or D.