Reading...
Play button
Play button
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;
154 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Fallacy of ACcent
|
pronunciation; put stress in different spot to give it a different meaning
|
|
|
FAllacy of Amphiboly
|
sentecne structure causes confusion
grammar errror |
|
|
Fallacy of Equivocation
|
word has more than one meaning
4 terms |
|
|
Formal fallacy
|
-proccess of reasoning
Affirming Consequent Denying Antecedent |
|
|
Fallacy of 4 terms
|
have 4 terms
|
|
|
Illicit Major and minor
|
distribution error
U -> D |
|
|
Negative or Particular premises
|
yield no conclusion
|
|
|
Undistributed Middle
|
fallacy
|
|
|
Qualified to unqualified
|
He is a great scientist (qual) therefore he his a great person (unqual)
|
|
|
Accident
|
treating somehting contingent as if it were necessary
|
|
|
Affirming a weak disjunct
|
"or"
affirm one leads to no conclusion |
|
|
Appeal to Misplaced authority
|
-appeal to an authority with no expertise in subject matter
|
|
|
Appeal to force
|
aggree with me or i'll beat you up
|
|
|
Appeal to ignorance
|
something is T b/c you can't disprove it
something is F b/c you can't prove it |
|
|
Appeal to Popularity
|
truth not arrived at by way of vote
|
|
|
Attacking the man (ad hominem)
|
attack opponent rather than argument
|
|
|
Beggin the Question
|
assume conclusion as a premise
|
|
|
Complex Quexstion
|
asking a question which is two questions in one but expecting one answer
"have you stopped beating your wife" |
|
|
Fallacy of Composition
|
assume what is true of the parts is true of the whole
|
|
|
Fallacy of Division
|
assume what is true of the whole is true of the parts
|
|
|
Post Hoc Fallacy
|
-since every case precedeeds its effect whatever preceeds the effect must be its cause
|
|
|
False Dilemma
|
presenting mutually exclusive and exhaustive options that are not so
|
|
|
Genetic Fallacy
|
origin of argument is why or why not its accepted
|
|
|
Hasty Generalization
|
don't have enough evidence to draw a conclusion
|
|
|
Poisoning the well
|
characterizing one's opponent as not even worth of a hearing
|
|
|
Red Herring
|
irrelevant fact that leads you away from the subject
|
|
|
Slippery Slope
|
incremental steps inevitable lead to a conclusion
-not all incremental steps are so |
|
|
Straw Man
|
tendency to portray opponent in a weaker light than position warrants
make them easier to defeat |
|
|
Tu Quo Que
|
"You do"
hypocrite |
|
|
)
|
"if, then"
|
|
|
v
|
"or"
|
|
|
.
|
"and"
|
|
|
=
|
equivalence
|
|
|
~
|
not
|
|
|
tautology
|
arguments that come out of T independently of the truth of its parts
|
|
|
Tautology
|
last column all T
|
|
|
Self-contradictory argument
|
last column all F
|
|
|
Paradox
|
2 apparantly sound lines of reasoning lead to incompatible conclusions
-contradict reason itself |
|
|
Modus Ponens (symbolic logic)
|
p ⊃ q
p ∴ q |
|
|
Modus Tollens (symbolic logic)
|
p ⊃ q
~q ∴ ~p |
|
|
Constructive Dilemma
|
(p ⊃ q) • (r ⊃ s)
p ∨ r ∴ q ∨ s |
|
|
Destructive Dilemma
|
(p ⊃ q) • (r ⊃ s)
~q ∨~s ∴ ~p ∨~r |
|
|
Simplification
|
p • q
∴ p -if p and q are both true then p is true |
|
|
Addition
|
p
∴ p ∨ q -if assume p then p or q is true; only one has to be true and at least p is |
|
|
Hypothetical Sylogism
|
p ⊃ q
q ⊃ r ∴ p ⊃ r q = middle term |
|
|
Disjunctive Syllogism
|
p ∨ q
~p ∴ q -one has to be true; both can't be false |
|
|
Conjuction
|
p
q ∴ p • q |
|
|
Liars Paradox
|
"This statement is false"
-if T then it must be F -if F then it must be T problem: False isn't normal Predicate -Proposition tells of the union b/w S and P -here; P asking do I belong to S but S is the whole statement =2nd order Predicate treated as if it were a 1st order predicate |
|
|
2nd order Predicate
|
Predicate used to describe logical entities
-about things in our head |
|
|
Judges Paradox
|
Tell thruth -> humane death
Tell lie -> painful death "I will die a painful death..." if T then it must be F (will die humanely) if F then it must be T (will die painfully) Problem: statement isn't T or F b/c it uses a future and contingent proposition Future contingent = undecided |
|
|
Two Groups Paradox
|
Everyone fits into one of two groups
1) those who fit into one of two groups 2) those that don't |
|
|
Barber's Paradox
|
Barber shaves all non-self shavers and only non-self shavers. Does the barber shave himself.
If yes; barber shaves a self shaver (not only non -self shavers) If no; barber doesn't shave all non self-shavers |
|
|
Problem with 2 groups and Barber's Paradox
|
defining people using a contradiction
-impossible for such people to exist -"all" and "only" lead to a contradiction of terms |
|
|
Suprise Quiz
|
A quiz you could not expect will be given on 1 of 5 days
-not last day ...all days go out -don't expect a SQ then which makes a SQ possible -its very impossibility proves it to be T (possible) |
|
|
Logical Paradox
|
call into question the validity of reason itself
|
|
|
Zeno's Paradox
|
In order to go the whole distance you must first go 1/2 way.
-infinite process -motion is an allusion |
|
|
What is the point of paradoxes?
|
What is the point of studying, classifying, and resolving paradoxes? Paradoxes indicate a sort of boundary line in
logic. We run into them when we take an aspect of logic for granted, or make a subtle, though unfounded, assumption. It is through the solution of paradoxes that we have come to see certain aspects of our notions of truth and falsity, of contradiction, and of how things can be grouped or classified more clearly. Paradoxes are not, then, merely puzzles; they are opportunities to discover something new about how the human mind works and human reasoning |
|
|
4 Questions
|
1. Is it? (Sensation)
2. What is it? (Definitions - Simple Apprehension) 3. Is it so? (Propostions - Judgment) 4. Why is it? (Syllogisms - Reasoning) |
|
|
Simple Apprehension's goal?
|
defining
creates concepts |
|
|
Concepts
|
exist in the mind
indicate the esssence or nature of things (define) answer question "What is it?" |
|
|
3 attributes of concepts
|
1. Universal
2. Unchanging -can associate it w/ different things but the concept is common to everyone 3. Necessary Attributes -ex. square -concepts lead to othr concepts |
|
|
Term
|
a word we give to a concept
-point to the concept -concept point to the "it" or "thing" |
|
|
Judgment
|
always entails a S and P
|
|
|
Propositions do 2 things...
|
Connect or Separate concepts
"is" or "is not" |
|
|
Valid
|
Argument set up in right way where a conclusion logically follows
|
|
|
Sound argument
|
Valid and true conclusion
|
|
|
Material Logic
|
content comes form all academic areas of study
|
|
|
Formal Aspect of Logic
|
Validity comes from philosophy; structure
|
|
|
Intentionality
|
pointing outside oneself
|
|
|
idealism
|
-you are just a mind; nothing outside yourself
|
|
|
signs
|
-have intentionality
ex. STOP sign -signs point to something outside themselves -concepts and terms are both signs |
|
|
Natural Signs
|
thing it points to naturally follows
ex. smoke pointing to fire |
|
|
Conventional Signs
|
its meaning is determined by us
ex. smoke signaling a new pope |
|
|
Signatum
|
the "thing" a sign points to
|
|
|
Material signs
|
points to signatum as the result of having been seen itself first
-see sign then realize signatum |
|
|
Formal Signs
|
realize the signatum/signifcation first; only later do we see sign
-concepts! don't think about thoughts just what they point to |
|
|
Characteristics of Concepts
|
1. Universality - apply them to many things (all things)
2. Extension and Comprehension |
|
|
Extension and Comprehension
|
Extension - quantitative; how many
Comprehension - qualitative -inversely related |
|
|
Concepts: Collective and Divisive
|
Collective - as a whole
ex. apples weigh 500 lbs. Divisive - as individuals |
|
|
Terms
|
Conventional material signs
-man made -see word then thing |
|
|
Order of signifying
|
terms -> concepts -> thing
word "dog" concept of dog in mind an actual dog |
|
|
Order of Knowing
|
thing -> concepts -> terms
-see dog -dog concept in mind -make up term/word for it |
|
|
Usage of words: Univocally
|
using word with same meaning at least twice
-bark of oak -bark of maple |
|
|
Usage of words: Equivocally
|
using word with different and unrelated meanings
-bark of oak -bark of dog |
|
|
Usage of words: Analogously
|
using word with related but different meanings
-bark of tree -almond bark |
|
|
Categories
|
concepts which have no concepts above them
-starting point for definitions |
|
|
Substance vs. Accident
|
Substance - exists in its own right
Accident - exists in another substance and not in itself |
|
|
The 10 Categories
|
1. Substance
2. Quantity 3. Quality 4. Relation -connections b/w things 5. Action 6. Passion - being done to it 7. Location 8. Position - arrangement 9. Time 10. Possession - |
|
|
Predicables
|
relations a Predicate has to Subject
|
|
|
6 Predicables
|
Genus
Species Specific Difference Property Necessary Accident Contingent Accident |
|
|
Essential things:
|
-essence of a thing; tells us what something is
Genus, Species, Specific Difference |
|
|
Genus
|
Categories are genuses
expresses relationship in a general way |
|
|
Species
|
that which can only be divided by its individual members
|
|
|
Specific Difference
|
the difference that makes it this species rather than another species; the essence of a thing
ex. human beings = rationality |
|
|
Property
|
unique and necessary characteristic of a thing
ex. 3 angles in a triangle |
|
|
Necessary Accident
|
necessary characteristic but not unique
ex. respiration |
|
|
Contingent Accidents
|
not necessary, not unique, not essential characteristic
ex. eye sight, musical |
|
|
Contradiction
|
exclusive (not both) and exhaustive (nothing inbetween)
|
|
|
Contrary
|
exclusive but not exhaustive
-allow for intermediates; middle ground (hot or cold) |
|
|
essential definition
|
defines essence of a thing
human - rational animal |
|
|
Descriptive definition
|
genus and property
"musical animal" |
|
|
Causal definition
|
genus and cause
|
|
|
Material definition
|
genus and material
-what it is made out of |
|
|
Rules for division
|
1. Exhaustive
2. same basis for definition 3. Exclusive 4. members must be less extensive than what is being divided |
|
|
Propositions
|
statements that signify T or F
|
|
|
Self-evident propositions
|
propositions we know are T but can't be proved
|
|
|
Principle of Contradiction
|
a thing cannot both be and not be at the same time
-can't be proved |
|
|
Principle of Excluded middle
|
no middle ground b/w contradictories
-one has to be T, the other F |
|
|
Self refuting proposition
|
necessarily false
"there is no truth" |
|
|
verb copula
|
connects or separates S and P
|
|
|
Affirmative Quality
|
P joined to S
"is" |
|
|
Negative Quality
|
P separated fro S
"is not" "No...is" |
|
|
4 types of Quantity
|
1. Universal (all, no)
2. Particular (some) 3. Indefinite (dogs, etc.) 4. Singular (individual) |
|
|
Universal Affirmative
Universal Negative Particular Affirmative Particular Negative |
All S is P
No S is P Some S is P Some S is not P not all S is P All S is not P |
|
|
Distribution
|
-distributed when it is fully extended
|
|
|
Distribution chart
|
Type S P
A D U E D D I U U O U D -Distributed P - negative quality -Distributed S - universal quantity |
|
|
Supposition
|
characteristic of a term in light of what the copula requires
-tense of the verb |
|
|
3 types of Supposition
|
1. Material - a term taken merely as a term
2. Simple - term taken to refer to a nature just as such 3. Personal - term taken to refer to a nature that extends to individuals -can't change supposition of term |
|
|
Square of Opposition
|
A - E = contrary
A - I = subalternates A - O = contradictories E - O = subalternates E - I = contradictories I - O = subcontraries |
|
|
Contradictories
|
1 = T
1 = F |
|
|
Contraries
|
-saying opposite things
-universality in common -if one is T; the other F -both can't be T -both can be F -one is F the other is U |
|
|
Sub contraries
|
both can be T
both can't be F if T; the other is U if F; the other is T |
|
|
Subalternates
|
descend with truth
rise with falsity |
|
|
Conversion
|
switching S and P maintaining quality and truth
E -> E (simply) E -> O (accidently) I -> I (simply) A -> I (accidental) O (no conversion) |
|
|
Obversion
|
change quality
I to O O to I A to E E to A 1. Change quality 2. Contradict P |
|
|
Conjunctive Propostion
|
combine two propositions
S and P -both must be T -otherwise whole thing is F |
|
|
Weak Disjunctive Proposition
|
S or P
-both could be T -both can't be F -at least one is T |
|
|
Strong Disjunctive
|
Either, or
-one is T -on is F |
|
|
Conditional/Hypothetical
|
"if, then"
|
|
|
Implicitly compound proposition
|
Only seniors can graduate
-makes 2 statements 1 statement |
|
|
major term
|
P of conclusion
|
|
|
minor term
|
S of conclusion
|
|
|
middle term
|
term not in conclusion
term in both premises |
|
|
Figure 1
|
m P
S m S P |
|
|
Figure 2
|
P m
S m S P |
|
|
Figure 3
|
m P
m S S P |
|
|
Figure 4
|
P m
m S S P |
|
|
Rules for Validity
|
1. Only 3 terms
2. U -> D = illicit major or minor 3. middle term not in conclusion 4. Undistributed middle 5. Two negative premises 6. Two affirmatives...no conclusion 7. follow the weaker part A E,I O 8. 2 particulars; no conclusion |
|
|
Rules to use when checking for validity
|
2. U -> D
4. Undistributed middle 7. follow the weaker part |
|
|
Venn Diagrams
|
Universal premise - shade in area that doesn't exist anymore
Particular - use x to designate an individual |
|
|
1 2 3
Barabara Camestre Darapti Celaret Festino Disamis Darii Baroco Datisi Ferio Cesare Bocardo Ferison Felapto |
1st cons - Figure 1 mood it converts to
s = simple conversion m = switch premises p = accidental conversion |
|
|
Cesare figure 2
No P is M All S is M No S is P |
Celaret, figure 1
No M is P (simple conversion) All S is M No S is P |
|
|
Compound Propositions
Conjunctive Weak Disjunctive Strong Disjunctive Conditional |
"and"
"or" "either, or" "if, then" |
|
|
Conditional Syllogisms
a) Affirm ant. -> affirm cons (MP) b) Affirm cons -> fallacy of AC c) Deny ant -> fallacy of DA d) Deny cons -> Deny ant (MT) |
ya that's right
|
|
|
Strong Disjuncitve (exclusive)
|
"either, or"
-has to be one or the other -not both |
|
|
Weak Disjunctive (inclusive)
|
both could be T
-at least one is T |
|
|
Dilemma
|
combines conditional and disjunctive arguments
Either A or B If A then C If B then C therefore, C -same conclusion no matter what |
|
|
Steer b/w the horns
|
there are other possibilities
not a dilemma in first place |
|
|
Take dilemma by the horns
|
deny the "then" statement
|
|
|
Rebutting the dilemma
|
propose counter dilemma
flip it around |
|
|
Enthymeme
|
syllogism with a premise or conclusion not stated
|
|
|
Enthymemes
1st order 2nd order 3rd order |
1st - leave out major premise
2nd - leave out minor premise 3rd - leave out conclusion |
|
|
Sorites
|
collection of premises
lead to an overall conclusion -knock out middle terms left with minor and major terms |
|
|
Epicherema
|
argument within a premise
premise for the premise |
