Philo (1St Final) [1St Lesson]

Front 1

A ______ is an error in logic that can be seen in the argument's form.

Back 1

Formal Fallacy

Front 2

An argument that is intended by the arguer to be deductively valid, that is, to provide a guarantee of the truth of the conclusion provided that the argument's premises are true.

Back 2

Deductive Argument

Front 3

All men are mortal. Joe is a man. Therefore, Joe is mortal

Back 3

Deductive argument

Front 4

Bachelor's are unmarried men. Bull is unmarried. Therefore, Bill is a bachelor.

Back 4

Deductive argument

Front 5

An ______ occurs when contents of an argument's stated premises fail to adequately support its proposed conclusion

Back 5

Informal Fallacy

Front 6

The word _____ does not mean it is inferior, casual, or improper. It only means that our focus is not on the form of the argument but on the meaning of the argument.

Back 6

Informal

Front 7

An ____ involves things like: miuse of language such as grammar, misstatments of fact or opinion, misconceptions due to underlying presuppositions, or just plain illogical sequence of thought.

Back 7

Informal Fallacy

Front 8

An argument that is intended by the arguer to be strong enough that if the premises were to be true then it would be unlikely that conclusion is false.

Back 8

Inductive Argument

Front 9

Socrate was Greek. Most Greek eat fish. Socrate ate fish.

Back 9

Inductive Argument

Front 10

Urging the hearer to accept the argument based upon on appeal to emotions, sympathy, etc. Which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea.

Back 10

Appeal to pity (Argument ad Misercordiam)

Front 11

Oh come on, I've been sick. That's why I missed the deadline.

Back 11

Appeal to pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam)

Front 12

Whatever has not been proved false must be true; vise versa

Back 12

Appeal to ignorance (Argumentum ad ignorantian)

Front 13

Assuming that the conclusion is true because its opposite cannot be prove.

Back 13

Appeal to ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantian)

Front 14

This is a logical chain of reasoning of a term or a word several times, but giving the particular word a different meaning each time.

Back 14

Equivocation

Front 15

Using a term in its different sense or meaning and making it appear to have only one meaning.

Back 15

Equivocation.

Front 16

This infers that something is true of the whole form the fact that it is true of some part of the whole.

Back 16

Composition

Front 17

Wrongly inferring that what holds true of the individuals automatically holds true of the group of those individuals.

Back 17

Composition

Front 18

One reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts.

Back 18

Division