Logic: Critical Thinking Ch. 1-4

Front 1

Claims, judgments, and arguments

Back 1

The basic elements of persuasion and communication

Front 2

Claims and Propositions

Back 2

A statement that something is the case.

Are either true or false

Hint 2

Ex: Ice is cold.

Front 3

Objective Claims

Back 3

Claims that are true or false regardless of our beliefs or opinions. It doesn't matter what you think, it's either true or false.

Hint 3

Ex: The world is round.

Front 4

Subjective Claims

Back 4

Claims whose truth and falsity depends on our beliefs and opinions.

Hint 4

Ex: Gandalf is cooler than Magneto.

Front 5

Moral Subjectivism

Back 5

The theory that all moral claims are subjective.

Hint 5

Ex: Gay marriage is immoral.

Front 6

Beliefs, Judgments, and Opinions

Back 6

The "mental attitude" we take towards a proposition.

Not objective or subjective.

Hint 6

Ex: I believe that Italy is a beautiful country.

Front 7

Argument

Back 7

What you build out of the basic elements.

A set of premises and the conclusion that they support.

Hint 7

Ex: Premise 1: If something is an apple, then it is also a fruit.
Premise 2: This is an apple.
Conclusion: So this is a fruit.

Front 8

Premise

Back 8

A claim that helps support the conclusion of an argument.

Hint 8

Ex: Premise 1: I am either alive, or dead.
Premise 2: I am not dead.
Conclusion: I am alive.

Front 9

Conclusion

Back 9

The claim supported by the premises. The point of the argument.

Hint 9

Ex: Premise 1: Eating meat is murder.
Premise 2: Murder is wrong.
Conclusion: So eating meat is wrong.

Front 10

Deductive Argument

Back 10

An argument such that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

Hint 10

Ex: Premise 1: I am either a potato or a lobster.
Premise 2: I am not a potato.
Conclusion: I am a lobster

Front 11

Valid, Validity

Back 11

When, if the premises are true, the conclusion would have to be true too.
Not about the truth of the premises, but the hypothetical possiblity that they could be true.

Front 12

Sound

Back 12

When an argument is valid AND the premises really are all true.

Front 13

Inductive Argument

Back 13

An argument where, if the premises are true, the conclusion is PROBABLY true.

Hint 13

Ex: P1: Most refined women prefer to study in the library.
P2: Claire is a refined woman.
C: Claire prefers to study in the library.

Front 14

Strong

Back 14

If the truth of the premises makes the conclusion very likely

Hint 14

Ex: P1: 70% of women pump iron.
P2: She is a woman.
C: She pumps iron.

Front 15

Weak

Back 15

When the truth of the premises does not make the conclusion likely.

Hint 15

Ex: P1: 2% of men pump iron.
P2: He is a man.
C: He pumps iron.

Front 16

Balance of considerations

Back 16

A kind of inductive reasoning that compares competing arguments of both deductive and inductive types.

Hint 16

Ex: Cost-benefit analysis

Front 17

Inference to the best explanation

Back 17

A kind of inductive reasoning that chooses among competing arguments/claims by identifying the "best" explanation.

Hint 17

We don't know whether the church was destroyed by a storm or by a dragon. However, since there hasn't been a dragon here for at least 3 years, it was a storm.

Front 18

Vagueness

Back 18

When the group of things a word or phrase applies to has borderline cases.

Hint 18

Ex: The USA does not condone torture.

Front 19

Generality

Back 19

The less detail a claim provides, the more it is this.

Hint 19

Ex: "I like Harry Potter." vs. "I am the number one Harry Potter fan in the Western Hemisphere."

Front 20

Ambiguity

Back 20

When a word or phrase has more than one meaning.

Hint 20

Ex: Kids make nutritious snacks

Front 21

Semantic Ambiguity

Back 21

Refers to the meaning of a word.

When a phrase contains a homonym- a single word with two meanings.

Hint 21

Ex: He gave his grandma a ring.

Front 22

Grouping Ambiguity

Back 22

Whether a word refers to a group of people, or to the individuals in that group.

Hint 22

Ex: Human beings eat 40 billion lbs of food each day.

Front 23

Syntactic Ambiguity

Back 23

Ambiguity that arises because of sentence structure.

Hint 23

Ex: For your homework, read chapter 5 or chapter 6 and chapter 7.

Front 24

Definition

Back 24

A statement that conveys the meaning of a word or phrase without using the word itself.

Front 25

Lexical Definition

Back 25

Tells us what the word ordinarily means.

Hint 25

Ex: A bachelor is an unmarried man.

Front 26

Stipulative Definition

Back 26

Assigns a new name to a thing or description.

Hint 26

Ex: Anytime we have an orange-colored, citrus fruit, we'll call it an orange.

Front 27

Precising Definition

Back 27

Used to eliminate ambiguity.

Hint 27

Ex: (In a contract) Daniel Pilchman, hereafter "Professor," shall be expected to perform the following duties.

Front 28

Persuasive (Rhetorical) Definition

Back 28

"Pseudo-definitions" that act like they are defining something in order to persuade you of something.

Hint 28

Ex: Republicans are politically backwards rednecks.

Front 29

Definition by example

Back 29

Defining something by giving an example

Hint 29

Ex: This is a projector

Front 30

Definition by synonym

Back 30

Defining a word by giving another word with the same meaning.

Hint 30

Ex: Fastidious means fussy.

Front 31

Analytical definition

Back 31

Specifies features/Criteria/characteristics that a thing of that kind must possess.

Hint 31

Ex: A refrigerator is a kitchen appliance that keeps food cool.

Front 32

Credibility

Back 32

A claim has this if you should believe it.

Hint 32

Ex: I am a credible philosophy professor.

Front 33

Two parts of assessing the credibility of a claim

Back 33

1. The credibility of the claim itself.

2. The credibility of the source.

Front 34

Conflicts with observation

Back 34

A claim is not credible if it conflicts with what we have observed ourselves through our senses

Front 35

Conflicts with your background knowledge

Back 35

A claim is not credible when it conflicts with what (you think) you know.

Front 36

Conflicts with other credible beliefs

Back 36

A claim is not credible when it conflicts with other credible claims.

Front 37

Three factors that influence a source's credibility

Back 37

1. Speaker's interest (Interested party)
2. Physical and other characteristics
3. Expertise

Front 38

Speaker's interest (Interested Party)

Back 38

A source that stands to benefit/gain from your believing or disbelieving a claim.

Hint 38

Ex: A car salesman wants you to believe their cars are the best, because that is how they make money.

Front 39

Physical and other characteristics

Back 39

What a speaker is like.

Front 40

Expertise

Back 40

Speaker's special knowledge or training.