Logic Exam I

Front 1

Abduction

Back 1

aka "inference to the best explanation" is a category of reasoning subject to inductive criteria in which the conclusion is supposed to explain the truth of the premises.

Front 2

Argument

Back 2

a finite set of statements, some of which--the premises-- are supposed to support, or give reasons for, the remaining statement--the conclusion.

Front 3

Cogency

Back 3

An argument is ___ if and only if it is inductively strong and all of the premises are true.

Front 4

Deductive Validity

Back 4

an argument (form) is ___ if and only if it is not possible for ALL the premises to be true and the conclusion false.

Front 5

Inductive Strength

Back 5

An argument is ___ to the degree to which the premises provide evidence to make the truth of the conclusion plausible or probable.

Front 6

Logic

Back 6

the study of (i) criteria for distinguishing successful from unsuccessful arguments (ii) methods for applying those criteria, and (iii) related properties of statements such as implication, equivalence, logical truth, consistency etc

Front 7

Soundness

Back 7

An argument is ___ if and only if it is deductively valid AND all of its premises are true.

Front 8

Statement

Back 8

a declarative sentence which attempts to state a fact

Front 9

Truth Value

Back 9

the ___ of a statement is just its truth or falsehood. Can be either true or false but not both.

Front 10

Argument form

Back 10

(Schema) is the framework of an argument which results when certain portions of the component statements are replaced by blanks, schematic letters, or other symbols.

Front 11

Argument instance

Back 11

what results when you appropriately fill in the blanks of an argument form/schema

Front 12

Metalanguage

Back 12

when one is talking about a language, this is the language in which one is talking about the object language

Front 13

Object language

Back 13

when one is talking about language, this is the language being talked about

Front 14

Truth Functional Entailment

Back 14

A set (gamma) of WFFs of S truth functionally entails a WFF P iff there is no truth value assignment on which all the members of gamma are true and P is false.

Front 15

Truth Functionally Consistent Set of Wffs

Back 15

A set (gamma) of WFFs of S is TFly consistent iff there is at least one tva on which all members of gamma are true.

Front 16

Truth Functionally Satisfiable WFF

Back 16

iff P is not truth functionally false. There is at least one True tva

Front 17

Truth Functionally Contingent WFF

Back 17

iff P is neither truth functionally true nor truth functionally false. False on at least one tva and true on at least one tva.

Front 18

Truth Functionally Contradictory Pairs of WFFs

Back 18

iff there is no tva on which they have the same truth value

Front 19

Truth Functionally Equivalent pairs

Back 19

iff there is no tva on which they differ in truth value

Front 20

Truth Functionaly false WFF

Back 20

false on every tva

Front 21

Truth Functionally Falsifiable

Back 21

iff P is not truth functionally true

Front 22

Truth Functionally Valid

Back 22

iff there is no truth value assignment on which all the premises are true and the conclusion false.

Front 23

Truth Functionally True WFF

Back 23

iff P is true on every truth value assignment