Exercise
1. A deductive argument may be (a) Valid and sound
2. A valid, deductive argument may have (a) true premises and a true conclusion (b) False Premises and a True Conclusion
3. An inductive argument logically guarantees the truth of its conclusion (b) False
4. In deductive reasoning is when you provide premises that are presume to be true to get a guarantee truth of the conclusion in order to be valid. A example of the od a deductive agreement is
1. Humans are mortal
2. Carlos is human
C. Carlos is mortal
This valid since the premises are true and the premises logically follow conclusion, which makes the agreement sound.
In an inductive reasoning you are trying to think the most probability conclusion base on the premises. An example …show more content…
The distinction between moral obligation and moral permissibility is that in obligation is action that you have to do and permissibility is an action that is neither right or wrong. An example that is moral obligation action is that you have to take care your child. An example that is moral permissibility action is not to buy a new toy for your child.
6. Balancing of moral norms is when you are to judge an action base on the weight and case of the actions with other norms to make a moral judgment. An example would be that you steal from the rich in order to get food for the people that are starving. In which you are doing something that is wrong by stealing but you are saving a person life by doing something wrong.
7. The specification of moral norm is the opposite of balancing of moral norms as you are reducing the scope of norms to specific norm in order to come what a moral judgment. An example is a guy that stole from the rich is sent to prison because he broke the law even though he save many people.
8. (a) 1. If you have the right algorithm, then your program won’t crash (p→-q) 2. If your program doesn’t crash and there is no power failure, then you should have your solution by noon. (-q&-f)→ …show more content…
Also it gives a counter argument, which it disproves and came up with the conclusion. While the premises is base on that God is real and that is we follow God commands, it still able to prove that God will is dependent of God’s Will. However, the whole argument relied on the notion “God is Good” means that “God command are God commands”, if argument did not define this then they whole argument would not had work. Also the whole concept in which moral law would be arbitrary if God willed what is right and wrong must be define to order to
1. A deductive argument may be (a) Valid and sound
2. A valid, deductive argument may have (a) true premises and a true conclusion (b) False Premises and a True Conclusion
3. An inductive argument logically guarantees the truth of its conclusion (b) False
4. In deductive reasoning is when you provide premises that are presume to be true to get a guarantee truth of the conclusion in order to be valid. A example of the od a deductive agreement is
1. Humans are mortal
2. Carlos is human
C. Carlos is mortal
This valid since the premises are true and the premises logically follow conclusion, which makes the agreement sound.
In an inductive reasoning you are trying to think the most probability conclusion base on the premises. An example …show more content…
The distinction between moral obligation and moral permissibility is that in obligation is action that you have to do and permissibility is an action that is neither right or wrong. An example that is moral obligation action is that you have to take care your child. An example that is moral permissibility action is not to buy a new toy for your child.
6. Balancing of moral norms is when you are to judge an action base on the weight and case of the actions with other norms to make a moral judgment. An example would be that you steal from the rich in order to get food for the people that are starving. In which you are doing something that is wrong by stealing but you are saving a person life by doing something wrong.
7. The specification of moral norm is the opposite of balancing of moral norms as you are reducing the scope of norms to specific norm in order to come what a moral judgment. An example is a guy that stole from the rich is sent to prison because he broke the law even though he save many people.
8. (a) 1. If you have the right algorithm, then your program won’t crash (p→-q) 2. If your program doesn’t crash and there is no power failure, then you should have your solution by noon. (-q&-f)→ …show more content…
Also it gives a counter argument, which it disproves and came up with the conclusion. While the premises is base on that God is real and that is we follow God commands, it still able to prove that God will is dependent of God’s Will. However, the whole argument relied on the notion “God is Good” means that “God command are God commands”, if argument did not define this then they whole argument would not had work. Also the whole concept in which moral law would be arbitrary if God willed what is right and wrong must be define to order to