Philosophy - Logic - Chapter 1

Front 1

Logic

Back 1

Organized body of knowledge or science that evaluates arguments.

Front 2

Argument

Back 2

A group of statements, one or more of which (the premise) are are claimed toprovide support for, or reasons to believe, one of the others (conclusion).

Front 3

Statement

Back 3

A sentence that is either t rue or false - typically a declarative sentence or a sentence component that could stand as a declarative statement.

Front 4

Premise

Back 4

Statements that set forth reasons or evidence.

Front 5

Conclusion

Back 5

The statement that the evidence is claimed to support or imply.

Front 6

Conclusion Indicator

Back 6

Words that indicate a conclusion. Usually placed prior to the conclusion statment.

Examples:

Therefore, wherefore, thus, consequently, we may inter, accordingly, we may conclude, it must be that, for this reason, so, entails that, hence, it fllows that, implies that, as a result.

Front 7

Premise Indicator

Back 7

Indicates that a statement is a premise.

Examples:

Since, as indicated by, because, for, in that, may be inferred from, as, given that, seeing that, in as much as, owing to.

Front 8

Inference

Back 8

Reasoning process expressed by an argument. Used interchangably with "arguement".

Front 9

Proposition

Back 9

The meaning or information content of a statement. Used interchangably with "statement".

Front 10

Truth Value

Back 10

Truth and falsity are two possible truth values of a statement.

Front 11

Factual Claim

Back 11

At least one of the statements must claim to present evidence or reasons.

Front 12

Inferential Claim

Back 12

The claim that the passage expresses a certain kind of reasoning process that supports or implies something or that something follows from something. Must be objective.

Front 13

Explicit Inferential Claim

Back 13

Usually asserted by premise or conclusion indicator words.

Example:

Mad cow disease is spread by feeding parts of infected animals to cows, and this practice has yet to be completely eradicated. Thus mad cow disease continues to pose a threat to people who eat beef.

Front 14

Implicit Inferential Claim

Back 14

Exists if there is an inferential relationship between the statements in a passage, but the passage contains no indicator words.

Example:

The genetic modification of food is risky business. Genetic engineering can introduce unintended changes into the DNA of the food-producing organism, and these changes can be toxic.

Front 15

Simple Non-Inferential Passage

Back 15

Unproblematic passages that lack a claim that anything is being proved.

Front 16

Warning

Back 16

Form of expression taht is intended to put someone on guard against a dangerous odetrimental situation.

Examples:

Watch out that you don't slip on the ice.
Whatever you do, never confide personal secrets to Blabbermouth Bob.

Front 17

Piece of Advice

Back 17

Form of expression that makes a recommendation about some future decision or course of conduct.

Example:

You should keep a few thingsi n mind before buying a used car. Test drive the car varying speeds and conditions, examind the oil in the crankcase, ask to see service records, and if possible, have the engine and power train checked by a mechanic.

Front 18

Statement of Belief or Opinion

Back 18

Expression about what someone happens to believe or think about something.

Example:

We believe that our company must develop and product outstanding products that will perform a great service or fulfill a need for our customers. We believe that our business must be run at an adequate profit and that the services and products we offer must be better than those offered by competitors.

Front 19

Loosely Associated Statements

Back 19

Same general subject but lack a claim that one of them is proved by others.

Example:

Not to honor men of worth will keep the people from contention; not to value goods that are hard to come by will keep them from theft; not to display what is desirable will keep them from being unsettled of mind.

Front 20

Report

Back 20

Consists of group statements that convey information about some topic or event.

Example:

Even though more of the worlds is immunized than ever before, many old diseases have proven quite resilient in the face of changing population and environmental conditions, especially in the developing world. New diseases such as AIDS, have taken their toll in both the North and the South.

Front 21

Expository Passage

Back 21

Kind of discourse that begins with a topic sentence lowed by one or more sentences that develop the topic sentence. If the objective is not to prove the topic sentence but only to expand it or elaborate it, then there is no argument.

Example:

There are three familiar states of matter: solid, liquid, and gas. solid objects ordinarily maintain their shape and volume regardless of their location. A liquid occupies a definite volume, but assumes the shape of the occupied portion of its container. A gas maintains neither shape nor volume. It expands to fill completely whatever container it is in.

Front 22

Illustration

Back 22

Expression involving one or more examples that is intended to show what something means or how it is done. Illustrations are often confused with arguments because many illustrations contain indicator words such as "thus".

Example:

Chemical elements, as well as compounds, can be represented by molecular formulas. Thus, oxygen is represented by O2, water by H2O and sodium chloride by NaCl.

Front 23

Arguments for Example

Back 23

Illustrations that can be taken as arguments.

Example:

Although most forms of cancer, if untreated, can cause death, not all cancers are life-threatening. For example, basal cell carcinoma, the most common of all skin cancers, can produce disfigurement, but it almost never results in death.

Front 24

Explanation

Back 24

An expression that purports to shed light on some event or phenomenon. The event or phenomenon in question is usually accepted as a matter of fact.

Examples:

The sky appears blue from the earth's surface because light rays fromt he sun are scattered by particles in the atmosphere.

The AIDS virus causes sickness and death because it infects certain white blood cells called T cells, and these cells are essential to the body's immune system.

Front 25

Explanandum

Back 25

Statement that describes the event or phenomenon to be explained.

Front 26

Explanans

Back 26

Statement or group of statements that purports to do the explaining.

Front 27

Conditional Statement

Back 27

If... then statement.

Example:

If professional football games incite violence in the home, then the widespread approval given to this sport should be considered.

Front 28

Antecendent

Back 28

Component statement following "if".

Front 29

Consequent

Back 29

Component statement following "then".

Front 30

Sufficient Condition

Back 30

Whenever the occurance of A is all that is needed for the occurrence of B. For example, being a dog is sufficient condition for being an animal.

Front 31

Necessary Condition

Back 31

Whenever A cannot occur without the occurrence of B. Thus being an animal is a necessary condition for being a dog.

Front 32

Deductive Argument

Back 32

An argument incorporating claim that is IMPOSSIBLE for the conclusion to be false given that the premise is true. Involves necessary reasoning.

Front 33

Inductive Argument

Back 33

An argument incorporating the claim that it is PROBABLE that the conclusion be false given that the premises are true. Involves probabilistic reasoning.

Front 34

Inductive Indicators

Back 34

Probably, improbably, plausible, implausable, likely, unlikely, reasonable to conclude.

Front 35

Deductive Indicators

Back 35

Necessarily, certainly, absolute, definitely.

Front 36

Argument Based on Mathematics

Back 36

Conclusion depends on some purely arithmetic or geometric computation or measurement.

Example:

As shopper places 2 apples and 3 oranges in the shopping carts. This concludes there are 5 fruit in the shopping cart.

All arguments in mathematics are DEDUCTIVE.

Front 37

Argument From Definition

Back 37

Argument in which the conclusion is claimed to depend merely on the definition of some word or phrase used in the premise or conclusion.

Example:

Someone might argue that because Claudia is mendacious, it follows that she tells lies, or that because a certain paragraph is prolix, it follows that it is excessively wordy.

Front 38

Syllogism

Back 38

An argument consisting of exactly two premises and conclusion.

Front 39

Categorical Syllogism

Back 39

Syllogism in which each statement begins with one of the words all, no, or some.

Example:

All ancient forests are sources of wonder.
Some ancient forests are targets of the timber industry.
Therefore, some sources of wonder are targets of the timber industry.

Front 40

Hypothetical Syllogism

Back 40

Syllogism having a conditional statement for one or both of its premises.

Example:

If Fox News is a propaganda machine, then it misleads its viewers.
Fox News is a propaganda machine.
Therefore, Fox News misleads its viewers.

Front 41

Disjunctive Syllogism

Back 41

syllogism having a disjunctive statement (i.e. either/or statement) for one of its premises.

Example:

Either global warming will be arrested, or hurricanes will become more intense.
Global warming will not be arrested.
Therefore, hurricanes will become more intense.

Front 42

Prediction

Back 42

An argument that proceeds from our knowledge of the past to a claim about the future. Usually inductive.

Front 43

Argument from Analogy

Back 43

An argument that depends on the existence of an analogy, or similarity, between two things or states of affairs.

Example:

Since my car is a great handling car. Then you, who has the same car, has a great handling car.

Front 44

Generalization

Back 44

An argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a selected sample to some claim about the whole group.

Example:

One might argue that since three oranges selected from a certain crate were juicy, that all the oranges from that crate are juicy. Inductive.

Front 45

Argument from Authority

Back 45

An argument that concludes something is true because it a presumed expert or witness has said it.

Example:

A lawyer might argue that so and so committed the murder because an eyewitness testified to that effect under oath. Probabilistic.

Front 46

Argument Based on Signs

Back 46

An argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a sign to a claim about the thing or situation that the sign symbolizes. (Sign meaning any type of message, usually visual, produced by an intelligent being)

Example:

When driving on an unfamiliar highway, one might see a sign indicating that the road makes several sharp turns one mile ahead. Probable.

Front 47

Causal Inference

Back 47

An argument that proceeds from knowledge of a cause to a claim about an effect, or conversely, from knowledge of an effect to a claim about a cause.

Example: From the knowledge that a bottle of wine had been accidentally left in the freezer overnight, someone might conclude that it had frozen. Inductive.

Front 48

Particular Statement

Back 48

Makes a claim about one or more particular members of a class.

Front 49

General Statement

Back 49

Makes a claim about ALL the members of a class.

Front 50

Valid Deductive Argument

Back 50

An argument in which it is impossible for the conclusion to be false given that its premises are true.

Validity is something that is determined by the RELATIONSHIP between premise and conclusion. The question is not whether the premises and conclusion are true or false, but whether the premises SUPPORT the conclusion.

Front 51

Invalid Deductive Argument

Back 51

A deductive argument which it IS possible for the conclusion to be false given that the premises are true.

Front 52

Sound Argument

Back 52

Deductive argument that is valid and has all true premises.

Front 53

Unsound Argument

Back 53

Deductive argument that is invalid, has one or more false premises, or both.

Front 54

Strong Inductive Argument

Back 54

An inductive argument in which it is improbable that the conclusion be false given that the premises are true.

Front 55

Weak Inductive Argument

Back 55

Argument in which the conclusion does not follow probably from the premises, even though it is claimed to.

Front 56

Cogent Argument

Back 56

Inductive argument that is strong and has all true premises.

Front 57

Uncogent Argument

Back 57

Inductive argument that is weak, has one or more false premises, or both.