Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
If P, then Q; Not Q---not P |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
If P, then Q; If Q, then R---If P, then R |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
If P, then Q---If not Q, then not P |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
All A are B; No B are C---No C are A |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
In deductive arguments, If the premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily, based on form |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
In deductive arguments, Iff it is valid and all of its premised are true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. rose 1 blooms in spring 2. rose 2 blooms in spring (etc)--all roses bloom in spring. Incidences of some class having a certain thing, thus all things in this class has this |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. most As are Bs; 2. H is an A---3. H is a B. Generalization --> specific thing |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1 or more premises are offered to support the hypothesis that a certain event is causally related to another event |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. m is A,B and C. 2. j is A, B and C. 3. s is A, B and C. 4. p is A and B; therefore 5. P is C |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
In inductive arguments, iff its form is such that, if its premises were true, it would be reasonable to accept its conclusion as true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
in inductive arguments, it has a reliable form and its premises are true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
What two characteristics do inductive arguments have? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
What two characteristics do deductive arguments have? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
In enumerative induction: too few examples, or the sample is not representative of the population |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
An analogy must make reasonable that the things alleged to be alike in the premises are in fact analogous in ways relevant to its conclusion |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. penguins + pigeons have beaks; 2. pigeons fly. Therefore 3. penguins fly |
|
|
Term
Post hoc ergo propter hoc |
|
Definition
After this, therefore because of this. (clock, shift-change) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
What is not the cause is mistaken for the cause. (Dog barks, wife is annoyed) |
|
|