Term
|
Definition
| Reasoning when making generalizations or analogies |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Means the making of a general rule from particular instances |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| means the forming of a conclusion from the information available |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| to express or indicate indirectly |
|
|
Term
| Inductive logic is not concerned with the .... of an argument |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Inductive logic's 2 main features |
|
Definition
- it gives good reasons for supporting a conclusion but it does not gaurantee that conclusion
- its conclusion contains information that is not in the argument
|
|
|
Term
| Three tests for soundness |
|
Definition
- sufficeint number
- varying circumstances
- the search for exceptions
|
|
|
Term
| Analogy is a type of ... logic |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Invalid forms of reasoning |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Formal fallacies
2. Informal fallacies |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| is the invalid reasoning found in syllogisms |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Argument ad Hominem translates into |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| What are the two types of ad hominem? |
|
Definition
1. Abusive
2. Circumstantial |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
to disparage the character of the opponetns, to deny their intelligence or reasonableness, to question their integrity..etc.
|
|
|
Term
| Ad Hominem, Circumstantial |
|
Definition
| Irrelevant connection between the beliefs held and the circumstances of those holding it that gives rise to the mistake |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
-type of ad hominem
-arguer makes his opponet appear hypocritical by pointing out something about the person he is arguing against |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When an argument relies upon premises that are not relevant to its conclusion, and therefore cannot possibly establish its truth |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Argument from Ignorance: drawing a conclusion with no evidence one way or the other |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Appeal-to-Authority Fallacy:'Research has shown", the calim is worthless unless backed up with specific references, which it seldom is |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Inappropriate Authority: when the appeal is made to parties having no legitmate claim to authority in the matter at hand |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Fallacy we commit when we move carelessly or too quickly to a generalization |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| False Cause: concluding that an event is caused by another simply because it follows that other |
|
|
Term
| Post hoc ergo propter hoc |
|
Definition
| After the thing, therefore, because of the thing: False cause; supposing that two things that are somehow connect cause each other |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Begging the Question: to assume the truth of what one seeks to prove, in the effor tto prove it; a circular argument |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Every-one-does-it: an argument to justify bad behavior; |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The appeals to emotion versionL chosen to manipulate the beliefs of the lister or reader; used by propagandists and advertisers |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Appeals to Pity: speacial case of the appeal to emoition-Appeal to Sympathy |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Appeals to Force: 'a boss says that is the way it is and if you cannot get on board maybe you better reconsider your future" |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Irrelevant conclusion: whenan arugment puproting to esatblish a particular conclusion is instead directed to proving a different conclusion-the premises 'miss the point' |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Fallacy of Relevance: except for those that commit a petitio principii- means that the stated conclusion does not follow from its premise(s) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Not Taking genuine exceptions into account |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Comparing two things perhaps wrongly |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Arguer uses the common desire to fit in with the crowd in order to make his conclusion more likely to be accepted |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Arguer distors his oppenents argument or position to make it appear weaker than it really is; then attack the distorted version, making a conclusion against the original argument or position |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An arguer distracts the reader or listener with some claim that is irrelevant to the issue at hand; then makes a conclusion concerning the irrelevant issue, or draws no conclusion at all |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An arguer makes a number of weak incutive inferences (often infolving puported casual connections) to a conclusion that is undesirable; then conclkudes that the initial step in the chain of inferences shouldn't be accepted |
|
|
Term
| But logic, amongst other things... |
|
Definition
- can help to identify and clarify vague or ambiguous statements
- can indicate unstated assumptions or biases
- can help us to identify unstated premises
- and can make us aware of the strength and validity of analogies or comparisons
|
|
|
Term
| Logic is the branch of philosophy that explores the way we reason. |
|
Definition
- To define 'correct' reasoning
- To distinguish good arguments from bad ones (the word 'argument' means stating the reasons for the conclusion)
- To pick out flaws and weakness's in reasoning.
- To create rules which enable us to test whether our reasoning is coherent and consistent.
|
|
|
Term
| Categorical Propositions: |
|
Definition
- A-The Universal Affirmative: All S is P.
- E-The Universal Negative: No S is P.
- I-The Particular Affirmative: Some S is P.
- O-The Particular Negative: Some S is not P.
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| _____ or ____ focuses on 'categorical proposition' |
|
Definition
| Classical or Aristotelian |
|
|
Term
Boolean Square of Opposition |
|
Definition
A:SP(bar)=0 E:SP=0
contradictories
I:SP≠0 O:SP(bar)≠0 |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Subject term distributed
A: All S is P E: No S is P
I: Some S is P O: Some S is not P
Subject term undistributed
Left=Predicate term undistributed
Right=Predicate term distributed |
|
|
Term
| Quality words for categorical propostion |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Quantity words for categorical propostions |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A valid standard form categorical syllogism must contain exactly 3 terms, each of which is used in the same sense throughout the argument.
If 4 terms, it is invalid. It is said to commit the Fallacy of Four Terms |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| In a valid standard form categorical syllagism, the middle term must be distributed in at least one premise. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| In a valid standard form categorical syllogism, if either term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in the premises. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| No standard form categorical syllogism having two negative premises is valid. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| If either premise of a valid standard form categorical syllogism is negatvie, the conclusion must be negative. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| No valid standard form categorical syllogism with a particular conclusion can have two universal premises. |
|
|
Term
| Deductive logic does not concern itself with..... only with..... |
|
Definition
| with the truth at all, only with the process of reasoning |
|
|
Term
| Whether a deductive argument is valid or invalid depends on wheither its.... is valid. |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a process of reasoing; series of reasons. |
|
|
Term
| A proposition distributes a term if it refers to.....of the class designated by the term |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| The Common part or common membership of two classes is called..or.. |
|
Definition
| the product or the intersection of the two classes |
|
|
Term
| By adding a BAR symbol, you produce the |
|
Definition
|
|
