Review. Logic is significant because it is the foundation of reason and well constructed-arguments

Similar documents
Deductive reasoning is the application of a general statement to a specific instance.

Hypothetical Syllogisms 1

def: An axiom is a statement that is assumed to be true, or in the case of a mathematical system, is used to specify the system.

CHAPTER 3. Methods of Proofs. 1. Logical Arguments and Formal Proofs

6.1 Standard Form, Mood, and Figure

1.2 Forms and Validity

Predicate logic Proofs Artificial intelligence. Predicate logic. SET07106 Mathematics for Software Engineering

Beyond Propositional Logic Lukasiewicz s System

PHILOSOPHY 101: CRITICAL THINKING

Philosophical argument

Kant s deontological ethics

Claims of Fact, Value, and Policy. A multidisciplinary approach to informal argumentation

Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning

Inductive Reasoning Page 1 of 7. Inductive Reasoning

HUMN-218 COURSE SYLLABUS FOR LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING. Jill R. Wood Instructor

Predicate Logic. Example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal.

Rules of Inference Friday, January 18, 2013 Chittu Tripathy Lecture 05

Likewise, we have contradictions: formulas that can only be false, e.g. (p p).

Syllogisms and Fallacies 101

Logic Appendix. Section 1 Truth Tables CONJUNCTION EXAMPLE 1

Logic and Reasoning Practice Final Exam Spring Section Number

CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS AND DIAGRAMMING. Some lawyers are judges. Some judges are politicians. Therefore, some lawyers are politicians.

P1. All of the students will understand validity P2. You are one of the students C. You will understand validity

DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE REASONING

Structuring and Analyzing Arguments: The Classical, Rogerian, and Toulmin Models. Junior AP English

A Few Basics of Probability

Teaching Critical Thinking Skills to English for Academic Purposes Students

Lecture 2: Moral Reasoning & Evaluating Ethical Theories

Math Week in Review #4. A proposition, or statement, is a declarative sentence that can be classified as either true or false, but not both.

Philosophy 3: Critical Thinking University of California, Santa Barbara Fall 2011

Philosophy 120: Introductory Logic Summer 2007

What happens when logic and psychology meet?

Existence Is Not a Predicate by Immanuel Kant

Divine command theory

A DIVISION OF THE MENO. Meno proposes a question: whether virtue can be taught. Three conversations or discussions following question

What Is Induction and Why Study It?

Development of a computer system to support knowledge acquisition of basic logical forms using fairy tale "Alice in Wonderland"

Artificial Intelligence

2.5 If-Then Statements and

CRITICAL THINKING REASONS FOR BELIEF AND DOUBT (VAUGHN CH. 4)

What Is Circular Reasoning?

INDUCTIVE & DEDUCTIVE RESEARCH APPROACH

L.A. Mission College Sylmar, California Spring 2012 Philosophy 06: Logic in Practice (3395) Thur 6:50-10:00 pm in Instr 1002

1/9. Locke 1: Critique of Innate Ideas

Building a Better Argument

Gödel s Ontological Proof of the Existence of God

Scientific Reasoning: A Solution to the Problem of Induction

The Refutation of Relativism

The Mathematics of GIS. Wolfgang Kainz

Mathematics for Computer Science/Software Engineering. Notes for the course MSM1F3 Dr. R. A. Wilson

Phil 2302 Intro to Logic. Introduction to Induction i

A. Arguments are made up of statements, which can be either true or false. Which of the following are statements?

First Affirmative Speaker Template 1

GLOBAL GOAL 1: THE STUDENT WILL ACQUIRE CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS. Instructional Learning objectives: The student will be able to...

ACTIVITY: Identifying Common Multiples

Logic in general. Inference rules and theorem proving

2nd Grade Language Arts Practice Test

Check Skills You ll Need. New Vocabulary union intersection disjoint sets. Union of Sets

Invalidity in Predicate Logic

1. Implication. Example 1. Each of the following statements is an implication: You can view Statement 1 above as a promise.

Program Level Learning Outcomes for the Department of Philosophy Page 1

COURSE SYLLABUS PHILOSOPHY 001 CRITICAL THINKING AND WRITING SPRING 2012

OA3-10 Patterns in Addition Tables

Examination paper for MA0301 Elementær diskret matematikk

A Short Course in Logic Example 8

p: I am elected q: I will lower the taxes

Cornell Critical Thinking Test Series THE CORNELL CLASS-REASONING TEST, FORM X

Buridan and the Avicenna-Johnston semantics

Fasit til øvingshefte

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3

PHIL : CRITICAL THINKING

Basic Set Theory. 1. Motivation. Fido Sue. Fred Aristotle Bob. LX Semantics I September 11, 2008

Full details of the course syllabus, support and examination arrangements are provided below.

MEN'S FASHION UK Items are ranked in order of popularity.

Nombre: Today is Monday. Yesterday was. Tomorrow will be. Today is Friday. Yesterday was. Tomorrow will be. Today is Wednesday.

Cosmological Arguments for the Existence of God S. Clarke

The History of Logic. Aristotle ( BC) invented logic.

Mathematics Test Book 2

Grade 8 Mathematics Data Analysis, Probability, and Discrete Mathematics: Lesson 3

Tom had 5 toy cars. His dad gave him 3 more toy cars. How many toy cars did Tom have in all?

A simple solution to the hardest logic puzzle ever

3. Mathematical Induction

Lecture Notes in Discrete Mathematics. Marcel B. Finan Arkansas Tech University c All Rights Reserved

Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning

Basic Proof Techniques

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS

LOGIC AND SETS CLAST MATHEMATICS COMPETENCIES

Introduction to Symbolic Logic Vaishali Khandekar, PhD Course Description: PREREQUISITE(S): CO-REQUISITE(S): FREQUENT REQUISITES

Nombre: Today is Monday. Yesterday was. Tomorrow will be. Today is Friday. Yesterday was. Tomorrow will be. Today is Wednesday.

6.2 Permutations continued

Analyzing Marketing Cases

or conventional implicature [1]. If the implication is only pragmatic, explicating logical truth, and, thus, also consequence and inconsistency.

Kant s Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals

QUANTITATIVE METHODS BIOLOGY FINAL HONOUR SCHOOL NON-PARAMETRIC TESTS

BASIC CONCEPTS OF LOGIC

PHIL 210 A Logic and Critical Thinking

Fun for all the Family 3- Quite a few games for articles and determiners

Course Description. Required Textbook

Predicate Logic. For example, consider the following argument:

Zoos Classroom Activity

Transcription:

Review Identify and explain the significance to the study of logic of each of the following terms: Logic The area of philosophy that studies correct reasoning and sound judgment Logic is significant because it is the foundation of reason and well constructed-arguments

Review Deduction a reasoning process that involves drawing a specific conclusion from a general statement or premise Deduction is significant because it is a formal reasoning process that allows people to arrive at logical conclusion

Review Induction A reasoning process that involves drawing a general conclusion from specific observations. Induction is significant because it enables people to arrive at conclusions based on their best evidence

Review The three laws of thought Developed by Aristotle, law of non contradiction, law of the excluded middle, the law of identity. Significant because they provide the underlying structure of logic

Review Logical Consistency Statements that do not contradict each other Significant because it is a necessary element of correct reasoning and sound judgement.

Review Logical Contradiction Statements that contradict each other or violate Aristotle s law of non-contradiction Significant because it helps people recognize arguments that are not sound or not reliable

Review Syllogism A form of formal deductive argument that consists of premises that lead to a conclusion Significant because they establish a structure that can be used to test the soundness of an argument

Review Validity The correctness of the reasoning in deductive arguments. Provides criteria for evaluating the logic of arguments

Types of Syllogisms Syllogisms are often categorized into three categories: Categorical Disjunctive Hypothetical Syllogisms can also be expressed by using letters (all A are B)

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism Aristotle was the first to use categorical syllogisms which states that things belong-or do not belong- in categories In categorical syllogisms there is a major premise, minor premise, and a conclusion

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All categorical syllogisms include A middle term that appears in the major and minor premises A Predicate term that appears in the major premise and the conclusion A subject term that appears in the minor premise and the conclusion

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All humans are mortals Socrates is a human Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All humans are mortals Socrates is a human Therefore, Socrates is mortal In letters: All A are B C is an A Therefore, C is a B

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All humans are mortals Socrates is a human Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All humans are mortals Socrates is a human Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All humans are mortals Socrates is a human Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All humans are mortals Socrates is a human Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All cats are pigs Garfield is a cat Therefore, Garfield is a pig

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All cats are pigs Garfield is a cat Therefore, Garfield is a pig Is there anything wrong with this argument? Is it logical and sound?

Types of Syllogisms Categorical Syllogism All cats are pigs Garfield is a cat Therefore, Garfield is a pig If either one of the premises are false the argument can t be sound, even though it may be valid

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity How do we know if a categorical syllogism is valid or invalid? Logicians have governed rules to test the validity of an argument

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity 1. Two negative propositions can never result in a positive conclusion a negative proposition says that something does not belong in a class of things. As a result the conclusion cannot go on to say that something does belong in a class

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity 1. Two negative propositions can never result in a positive conclusion No cats are fashion designers No dogs are cats Therefore, dogs are fashion designers

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity 2. When one of the premises expresses a negative, the conclusion must also be a negative. No cars are toys Toys are things you play with Therefore, cars are things you play with

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity No cars are toys Toys are things you play with Therefore, cars are things you play with The idea of playing with cars may be appealing, but the syllogism is invalid because it draws a positive conclusion when one of the premises expresses a negative proposition.

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity 3. No conclusion can be drawn from two particular propositions John is a student Some students are members of the school swim team Therefore, John is a member of the school swim team

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity All correct syllogisms can be shown in a Venn diagram All teachers are educators Nahla is a teacher Therefore, Nahla is an educator

Categorical Syllogisms Testing Validity All correct syllogisms can be shown in a Venn diagram Teachers Nahla Educators

Disjunctive Syllogisms Open with either-or statements In logic, the word disjunctive means involving a choice A disjunctive syllogism, therefore, expresses a choice

Disjunctive Syllogisms It states that either one thing or another is true and leaves in the possibility that both could be true When logicians do not want to mean both, they specifically say, either, but not both

Disjunctive Syllogisms Either Tom or Sasha (not both) is a baseball fan (Either A or B is C) Tom is not a baseball fan (A is not a C) Therefore, Sasha is a baseball fan (Therefore, B is a C)

Disjunctive Syllogisms (MP) Either Tom or Sasha (or both) is a baseball fan (MP) Tom is not a baseball fan (CON) Therefore, Sasha is a baseball fan The major premise states that one of two things is the case The use of the word or includes the idea or both. It is understood that or both is included.

Disjunctive Syllogisms (MP) Either Tom or Sasha (or both) is a baseball fan (MIP) Tom is not a baseball fan (CON) Therefore, Sasha is a baseball fan The minor premise of this syllogism denies one of the alternatives The conclusion then accepts the other alternative.

Disjunctive Syllogisms (MP) Either Tom or Sasha (or both) is a baseball fan (MIP) Tom is not a baseball fan (CON) Therefore, Sasha is a baseball fan This is a valid form of the argument. Compare it to the following example:

Disjunctive Syllogisms Either Tom or Sasha (or both) is a baseball fan (MIP) Sasha is a baseball fan (CON) Therefore, Tom is not a baseball fan Is this valid? NO..The word or in the first statement includes the idea or both. Just because Sasha is a baseball fan, it does not follow that Tim is NOT a baseball fan. Both could be fans as the premise stated

Disjunctive Syllogisms Either Tom or Sasha (or both) is a baseball fan (MIP) Sasha is a baseball fan (CON) Therefore, Tom is not a baseball fan Only one rule governs disjunctive syllogisms: To be valid, the premises must contain a denial of one alternative, and the conclusion must affirm the other

Hypothetical Syllogisms Easy to spot because they usually contain if-then statements At least one of the premises must be a hypothesis, which begins with the word if EX

Hypothetical Syllogisms If you water the garden, the tomato plants will grow If the plants grow, you will then have tomatoes to eat Therefore, if you water the garden, then you will have some tomatoes to eat If A, then B If B, then C Therefore If A then C

Hypothetical Syllogisms If you water the garden, the tomato plants will grow If the plants grow, you will then have tomatoes to eat Therefore, if you water the garden, then you will have some tomatoes to eat This argument is: Valid? Sound?

Hypothetical Syllogism What happens if hypothetical propositions do not express a true cause-and-effect relationship? If you buy that shirt, you will get a date If you get a date, you will be married in one year Therefore, if you buy that shirt, you will be married within one year Valid? Sond?