...discipline. Viewers are directed to the aspect of what arguments are in the area of logic. Arguments are not heated exchanges or personal assaults, but however they are a group of statements. Statements are sentences capable of being true or false. An example of a statement is saying, “All cats are vicious animals.” The next topic that is brought up in part one of the video is the subject of inference. Inference is the reasoning process of an argument. Inference can be explicit (using premise and/or conclusion indicator words) and implicit (the reader has to catch the inference). Finally the video concludes with the point that there are four non-inferences commonly mistaken for arguments these are: advice, assertion, reports, and explanations. Part two of the formal logic video is the topic of inference. As stated in the early video inference is the reasoning process of an argument. Viewers are now introduced with the topic of deductive and inductive arguments. A deductive argument means that there is no possibility of the conclusion being false when the premises are true. Inductive arguments mean that the premises merely make the conclusion likely (conclusion “goes beyond” the premises). Lastly inductive forms are arguments based on signs, prediction, and generalization just to name a few. Part three of the video talks about validity, strength, soundness, and cogency. Validity is either valid or invalid. Valid deductive arguments means that it is impossible for conclusion to...
Words: 423 - Pages: 2
...The Four Steps to Evaluating an Argument Sonya Walls PHL/458 January 19, 2015 Lance Principe The Four Steps to Evaluating an Argument An argument can have many sides to it, depending on time and location. It can be used as a statement or simply a rebuttal. Although an argument is usually viewed as a negative connotation, it does have some positive aspects. The four steps to evaluating an argument are: state your argument fully and as clearly as can be, examine each part of your argument for errors that are affecting the truth, examine an argument for validity errors, and if any errors are found eliminate them(Ruggiero, 2012). Each step helps to spring forth the next steps. This allows the user to have a way to make a legitimate argument which makes using them easier and convenient for anyone. In this paper, each step is explained and used in the eyes of an attorney presenting new evidence in a case. Each requires different actions but if used properly, will create a positive outcome. The first step in an argument is to state your argument fully and as clearly as can be ( Ruggiero, 2012). This situation proves that clarification is important. In the instance of an attorney in the courtroom, while he is defending his client, he has to understand the importance of making sense, and he also has to make sure that his message is being conveyed to the judge in a manner that will represent his client in the best way possible. This sets a platform that shows validity. The...
Words: 1740 - Pages: 7
... Another example of Reasoning You count 19 people in a group; which originally had 20 people in it; and you infer that someone is missing (input) (input) (deduce) (output) The Basic Idea Logic evaluates reasoning in terms of arguments. What is an argument? • The word “argument” can mean many different things depending on the context. • But for the purposes of logic, the term “argument” means something very specific: What is an argument? • an argument is a collection of statements, one of which is designated as the conclusion, and the remainder of which are designated as the premises. • Important note: premises are always intended to provide support or evidence for the conclusion, but they don't always succeed. (It’s still an argument either way.) What is a statement? • A statement is a declarative sentence, • i.e., a sentence that is capable of being true or false. • For example: The door is closed. • Other kinds of sentence are not capable of being true or false: • Interrogative sentences are inquiries for information: Is the door closed? • Imperative sentences make a command: Shut the #*&@% door! • Performative sentences make a declaration: I hereby pronounce the door closed! Some Examples of Arguments P1. Everyone believes that it's wrong to eat salty food. P2. If everyone believes that it's wrong to eat salty food, then it's wrong to eat pickles. C. Therefore, it's wrong to eat pickles. P1. The Bible says...
Words: 2744 - Pages: 11
...Joy Lawlor 02/09/2012 HUMN 210 Miriam Abbott Assignment 6-1 Assignment 6-1: Validity of an Argument Part 1: Cartoon stock. (n.d). Retrieved February 9, 2012 from http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/a/articles.asp This article has too many errors in it, right? If you are smart, you are Greek. And if you are Greek, you will write grammatically correct articles. But you cannot write grammatically correct articles. If you write grammatically correct articles, you are not Greek. Contradiction: You can write grammatically correct articles and you cannot write grammatically correct articles. Part 2: Form: If it is a cat, then it has four legs. It has four legs. ---------------------------------------------- Thus, it is a cat. A. What is the conclusion? The conclusion is it is a cat. B. What is the premise? There are two premises. If it is a cat, then it has four legs and it has four legs. C. Translating the argument. C → F F ------------ C D. Inductive or deductive argument? The argument uses premise and conclusions to provide an explanation. The use of two premises is another clue to determine whether the argument is inductive or deductive. Also, the premises in the above arguments are intended to prove the conclusion. This argument is a deductive argument. More specifically, the argument is fashioned in the form of modus ponens. The basic form of this is: If p, then q. p. --------------- Thus, q. E. Can the conclusion...
Words: 552 - Pages: 3
...propositions. eg.I am taller than you, It is raining, She will win the race. Premise- A statement that is offered in support of a conclusion Conclusion - A statement that is held to be supported by a premise or premises eg. All whales are mammals. Moby Dick is a whale. Moby Dick is a mammal. Argument- a set of statements one of which (the conclusion) is taken to be supported by the remaining statements (the premises). • The conclusion is what the speaker wants you to accept. • The premises state the reasons or evidence for accepting the conclusion. Inference- is the process of reasoning from a premise (or premises) to a conclusion (or conclusions) based on those premises. Explanation- tells you why something happened. Argument- tells you why you should believe something. • Arguments have something to prove; explanations do not. eg. 1. Adam stole the money, for three people saw him do it. 2. Adam stole the money because he needed to buy food. Premise-Indicator words: Since, Because, For, as, given that, inasmuch as, for the reason that Conclusion Indicator Words: Thus, Therefore, Hence, Entail(s), it follows that, we may conclude, consequently, so In arguments, premises do not always come before conclusions; conclusions do not always come after premises eg. Religious beliefs cannot be proven. If something is a matter...
Words: 1372 - Pages: 6
...CheckResults Concepts Components of an Argument - Claims Mastery 100% Questions Score: 6/11 1 2 Types of Argument 67% 3 4 6 Components of an Argument Differences Between Inductive and Deductive Arguments 50% 5 7 25% 8 9 10 11 Concept: Components of an Argument - Claims Concepts Components of an Argument - Claims Mastery 100% Questions 1 2 1.When evaluating an argument with unstated premises, which of the following is the most appropriate tactic? A. Find a claim that would make the argument invalid or weak and evaluate the argument as if this claim had been included. Don’t add anything. If the arguer had wanted a claim to be included, he or she would have included it. Evaluate the argument as it stands. B. C. Find a claim that would make the argument valid or strong and evaluate the argument as if this claim had been included. Correct! When you approach an argument without an obvious claim, the best approach is to “give the best read.” It is important to find the best claim to make the argument work. 2.All of the following are reasons that you should include claims that contradict the conclusion when diagramming an argument EXCEPT: A. B. C. It shows that you have considered other sides of the issue and found them wanting. To confuse your audience To bring up an objection, and then give reasons for rejecting it, is more powerful argumentation than to ignore possible objections to your argument. Including counterclaims in your argument helps make you look more credible...
Words: 840 - Pages: 4
...(CSR) beneficial to a company’s performance? An analysis of the relationship between CSR and financial soundness, quality of marketing, people management and long-term investment value. Introduction Since the late 1990s, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been increasingly discussed in the society and it slowly becomes one of the important components in the business world (Jenkins, 2005). McWilliams and Siegel (2006) interpret CSR as ‘situations where the firm goes beyond compliance and engages in “actions that appear to further some social good, beyond the interests of the firm and that which is required by law”’. In general, CSR is believed to, in long-term, enhance business performance and boost employee morale. Also, CSR could be a tool to improve company image and to prevent crises (Weber, 2008). This essay argues that CSR has a positive relationship with a company’s performance, meaning that it brings benefits to corporate performance to a large extent. To measure one’s performance, three key aspects are considered, namely financial soundness, quality of marketing and people management. These three aspects are chosen from the criteria for Britain's Most Admired Companies 2014 (Management Today, 2014). Effects of CSR on Financial Soundness One of the most crucial criteria to determine a company’s performance is by analysing its financial soundness. Common indicators for financial performance are Return of Assets (ROA), Return on Sales (ROS) and Return...
Words: 1547 - Pages: 7
...The problem of Evil is an argument that seeks to disprove God’s existence. In this paper, I will iterate and elaborate on the problem of Evil and deliver critical points that question the soundness and the strength of the argument so as to assess the argument from a critique’s standpoint. The problem of evil is based on the personalities of God, such that God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient. So, if such a perfect being with all the personalities were to exist, there would be no evil. However, evil does exist. Hence, God does not (sober, 119). The argument takes the logical form, if X then Not-Y. Y, hence not-X. In my opinion, this form is not prone to any counter-example, nor does it beg the question, suggesting that it is deductively...
Words: 836 - Pages: 4
...Concepts Components of an Argument - Claims Types of Argument Components of an Argument Differences Between Inductive and Deductive Arguments Mastery 100% 100% 100% 100% Questions 1 2 Score: 11/11 3 4 6 5 11 7 8 9 10 Concept: Components of an Argument - Claims Concepts Components of an Argument - Claims Mastery 100% Questions 1 2 1. When evaluating an argument with unstated premises, which of the following is the most appropriate tactic? A. Find a claim that would make the argument invalid or weak and evaluate the argument as if this claim had been included. B. Don’t add anything. If the arguer had wanted a claim to be included, he or she would have included it. Evaluate the argument as it stands. C. Find a claim that would make the argument valid or strong and evaluate the argument as if this claim had been included. Correct! The correct answer is: C. When you approach an argument without an obvious claim, the best approach is to “give the best read.” It is important to find the best claim to make the argument work. 2. All of the following are reasons that you should include claims that contradict the conclusion when diagramming an argument EXCEPT: A. It shows that you have considered other sides of the issue and found them wanting. B. To confuse your audience C. To bring up an objection, and then give reasons for rejecting it, is more powerful argumentation than to ignore possible objections to your argument. D. Including counterclaims...
Words: 895 - Pages: 4
...Final Exam Study Guide Introductory Materials: premise, conclusion, argument, validity, soundness, Test for Validity, Test for Soundness Warren: Warren’s Pro-Abortion Personhood Argument, Infanticide objection, other criticisms Thomson: Violinist Case, People-Seed Case, what each is meant to prove, Lottery Case, other potential responses to Thomson Marquis: Future Like Ours Argument, No Future Objection, other potential objections Other Sexual Topics: Uniqueness View: There is a special distinct sexuality, Non-Uniqueness View: sex is just like every other human interaction NOT SPECIAL , Love Theory: Sex is only permissible when you love the person with whom you are having sex, too restrictive: there’s other legitimate reasons to have sex, too broad your children?, New Natural law: Sex must fulfill the “marital good”, you must always act in accord the certain basic goods, martial good; unitive- only fulfill unitive if it involves full giving of oneself to another, procreative-only if both partners are open to chance of reproduction Things that are wrong for NNL: premarital sex, contraception, oral anal, mutual (Masturbation) generic liberal understanding: in general sex is morally ok so long as everyone consents (voluntary, informed) and it does not involve great harm (there can be overriding factors), reasons to consider polygamy wrong: sex with a non spouse, tends to subject women, reasons to consider incest wrong: higher percent rate of birth defects...
Words: 512 - Pages: 3
...Will Free will can be perceived as a quality one is born with no matter what your background is. But then again what is free will? And do we all have it? This strikes a huge argument with many outlooks on either the possibility of having free will or the possibility of not having free will. Ranging from Determinists such as Albert Einstein and Libertarians such as John Locke to everyday people such as me who truly believe that we are indeed free. We can conclude that there is a possibility for free thanks to these following premises and principles. According to the Principle of Alternate Possibilities one can choose to do one or the other. Therefore if given two possibilities it is in the power of the individual to either choose to go one way or the other. If I was given the possibility of eating a burrito or a salad I would make a choice depending on the way I felt that day. It could also be based on past habits, information about how healthy both choices are, belief, or my own eating habits. This option can be seen as being determined or free will, but in this instance we will pretend I chose whatever I chose freely. The argument above is both valid and sound. It is valid because both of my premises are true in any circumstance therefore there is no way of proving it false. The soundness is proven when we line up both premises and it gives us a conclusion. One can also conclude that there is no possibility for free will. According to casual Determinism a person’s...
Words: 587 - Pages: 3
...Imagine walking outside to go play with your three year old child and notice a drone flying overhead. Are you being targeted? An article from Atlantic Monthly Group, “Is Obama's Drone War Moral?,” by Matt Peterson attempts to persuade its readers that secretly the government is morally and legally justifying its killing's using America's drone program. The author's assertion and conclusion needs to be further analyzed to determine validity, soundness and cogency. As a result, we will evaluate the different logical fallacies, determine strengths and weakness and identify shortcomings in the conclusion. First, the piece has a few inductive reasoning and fallacy errors that try to convince its readers that the conclusion is genuine. For example, Obama's defense team is applying a generalization argument...
Words: 727 - Pages: 3
...Ke Zhan 詹可 Philosophy 120 J. Gentzler Summer 2016/5/31 Arguments of The impiety of Socrates In the “Apology” written by Plato, Socrates is charged of impiety that he teaches students not to believe in the gods in whom the city believes but in other new spiritual things (Plato, Apology,25b). Socrates argues that he is not guilty of impiety and he believes in the god. Perhaps the strongest argument that Socrates gives for this claim relies on the claim that the new spiritual things he believes are also belong to the extent of god. In this paper, I will argue that this argument fails because Socrates doesn’t have enough powerful evidences to prove that the thoughts he believes are the parts of scope that Athenian believes. In “Apology”, Melutus charges that Socrates teaches his students to believe new spirituals things. Facing to Meletus’s charges, Socrates defends himself from different aspects. Firstly, Socrates raises doubts about the Meletus’s real meaning of the charge. He corrects the accusation should be he doesn’t believe in gods at all. Let’s see how he gets the conclusion. From Melutus deposition, Socrates is charged of teaching his students to believe different spiritual thinking which didn’t admitted in Authens. Socrates argues that he doesn’t understand Meletus original thoughts. Because Meletus said that the sun is stone, and the moon earth, Sacrates indicates Meletus is antitheist. What’s more, according to Socrates’s sayings, because Meletus doesn’t believe in gods...
Words: 774 - Pages: 4
...Thinking about Thinking Critical thinking is a process of testing an argument or observation for legitimacy. (Moore & Parker, 2012) Critical thinking includes deductive and inductive arguments. One important survival skill humans have is critical thinking. Had our ancestors not had the ability to think critically, we would not be here. When determining the worth of an argument, it is necessary to break an argument into parts. One must determine the premise or premises and conclusion. Had our ancestors not learned that some red berries can kill you, many more would have eaten these berries; destroying the future of the gene pool. We learned that premises are statements of assumed or known facts which should not contradicts each other. (Moore & Parker, 2012) A conclusion is an assumption drawn from the premises. For example; one premise could be that two dogs sit before you. Another could be that both are white with black spots. Both statements suggest that the dogs belong to the same breed. We begin thinking critically by identifying the premises, then examining each for soundness. Any vagueness or uncertainty must be determined within the suggestions. In the case of a deductive argument, the conclusion must be true if the premises are true. (Moore & Parker, 2012) When the truth value of a conclusion is unclear, despite the truth of its premises, it is then an inductive argument. (Moore & Parker, 2012) For example; upon closer observation, one dog is white...
Words: 346 - Pages: 2
...If p then q. q. Therefore, p. Argument from ignorance this fallacy is committed if it is argued that since p has not been proved true, it must be false (or that since p has not been proved false, it must be true). Argument 1 The building blocks of arguments The purpose of an argument establishing, rather than simply stating a point Attacking the person this fallacy is committed if it is argued that p is false on the grounds that it is advanced by a particular person, for example because that person stands to gain from our acceptance of it as true or because that person’s behaviour is not consistent with the truth of p. CogencyCogency The characteristic of a cogent argument. A cogent argument is one such that if the premisses are true, then the conclusion is more likely to be true than false. Both valid and strong inductive arguments are cogent. Deductive argument an argument which attempts to prove certain conclusions based on what is contained in the premises alone, eg ‘All cats have tails. Felix is a cat therefore Felix has a tail.’ Denying the antecedent occurs when a premiss of an argument denies the truth of the antecedent of a conditional premiss, then concludes by denying the truth of the conditional premiss' consequent (see the Form). This form of argument is non-validating If p then q. p. Therefore, q False dilemma this fallacy is committed if, in the course of an argument, it is presumed without argument that p and q are the only two possibilities...
Words: 607 - Pages: 3
