KEY TERMS Argument: A conclusion together with the premises that support it. Premise: A reason offered as support for another claim. Conclusion: A claim.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
-- in other words, logic is
Advertisements

The Basics of Logical Argument Two Kinds of Argument The Deductive argument: true premises guarantee a true conclusion. e.g. All men are mortal. Socrates.
Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Deduction and Induction Elementary deduction, my dear Watson…
2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.
Deduction: the categorical syllogism - 1 Logic: evaluating deductive arguments - the syllogism 4 A 5th pattern of deductive argument –the categorical syllogism.
LESSON 3: PRACTICE WITH VALID/INVALID; MORE ON INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS Logic.
2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.
Logos Formal Logic.
 Monty Python – Argument Clinic video  Monty Python Monty Python.
An Introduction to Logic And Fallacious Reasoning
Deduction CIS308 Dr Harry Erwin. Syllogism A syllogism consists of three parts: the major premise, the minor premise, and the conclusion. In Aristotle,
Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-08: 1 Critical Issues in Information Systems BUSS 951 Seminar 8 Arguments.
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Geometry 1.0 – Students demonstrate understanding by identifying and giving examples of inductive and deductive reasoning.
Building Logical Arguments. Critical Thinking Skills Understand and use principles of scientific investigation Apply rules of formal and informal logic.
1 Arguments in Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy.
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning A Framework for Audience Analysis.
How to Argue Successfully Deductive and Inductive Reasoning.
Basic Argumentation.
Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning. Objectives Use a Venn diagram to determine the validity of an argument. Complete a pattern with the most likely possible.
Flawed Arguments COMMON LOGICAL FALLACIES.  Flaws in an argument  Often subtle  Learning to recognize these will:  Strengthen your own arguments 
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.
MA 110: Finite Math Lecture 1/14/2009 Section 1.1 Homework: 5, 9-15, (56 BP)
Laws of Logic. Deductive Reasoning Uses the following to form logical arguments. Facts Example: All humans breath air. Definitions Example: Two lines.
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism By David Kelsey.
Reason “Crime is common, logic is rare” - Sherlock Holmes.
Deductive vs. Inductive Logic This course is about deductive logic. But it is important to know something about inductive logic.
Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.
Persuasive Appeals Logos AP LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION.
Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from.
BBI 3420 Critical Reading and Thinking Critical Reading Strategies: Identifying Arguments.
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. PROBLEM SOLVING Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
The construction of a formal argument
Logic and Reasoning.
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
 Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.  You consider evidence you have seen or heard to draw a conclusion.
Deductive s. Inductive Reasoning
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism By David Kelsey.
Introduction to Argument Chapter 2 (Pgs ) AP Language Demi Greiner | Arlyn Rodriguez Period 4.
Deductive Reasoning. Inductive: premise offers support and evidenceInductive: premise offers support and evidence Deductive: premises offers proof that.
Do now Can you make sure that you have finished your Venn diagrams from last lesson. Can you name 5 famous mathematicians (including one that is still.
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
a valid argument with true premises.
Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning
Argumentation and Persuasion
Chapter 1 Definition Theory Causality
Win Every Argument Every Time
Chapter 3 Philosophy: Questions and theories
Common Logical Fallacies
Reasoning, Logic, and Position Statements
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Arguments.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Inductive and Deductive Logic
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Notes 2.3 Deductive Reasoning.
Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning
Logical Fallacies.
The Persuasive Speech Ch. 24.
Syllogisms.
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
Presentation transcript:

KEY TERMS Argument: A conclusion together with the premises that support it. Premise: A reason offered as support for another claim. Conclusion: A claim that is supported by a premise. Valid: An argument whose premises logically lead to its conclusion. Unsound: An argument that has at least one false premise.

KEY TERMS Induction A process of reasoning in which we use small, specific examples or observation to reach a BIG, general rule, conclusion or theory

KEY TERMS Deduction A process of reasoning in which we use BIG, general rules or theories to reach a conclusion about a specific observation or instances.

Inductive or Deductive 1. The Giants have lost their last seven games. Thus, they will probably lose their next game.  2. If you brush and floss your teeth daily then you will have fewer cavities. Marie brushes and flosses her teeth daily. Thus, she will have fewer cavities.  3. Jones will play tennis today if Smith plays. Jones will not play tennis today. Therefore, Smith will not play.  4. 4 out of 5 times I beat Corey at pool and I'm going to play him tomorrow. So, I'll very likely win. 5. No man has ever gotten pregnant. Therefore, no man ever will get pregnant.

Inductive or Deductive The Giants have lost … Inductive argument – uses 7 specific examples to reach a bigger conclusion  2. If you brush and floss your teeth … Deductive argument – states the broadly accepted research and reaches a specific conclusin  3. Jones will play tennis today if … Deductive argument –give the overarching rule that governs the behavior to predict a specific outcome  4. 4 out of 5 times I beat Corey… Inductive argument – uses specific examples to predict the conclusion 5. No man has ever gotten pregnant… Inductive argument – the conclusion is a BIG, overarching rule based on specific experiences to date.

The typical Syllogism looks like : KEY TERMS Syllogism: The simplest sequence of logical premises and conclusions, consisting of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. The typical Syllogism looks like :  Argument Form Syllogism Major premise: All A is B; All mammals are warm-blooded. Minor premise: All C is A; All black dogs are mammals. Conclusion: therefore all C is B Therefore, all black dogs are warm-blooded.

The typical argument form looks like : KEY TERMS Argument form: breaking down the sentences of an argument by substituting LETTERS for KEY TERMS The typical argument form looks like :  Argument Form Syllogism Major premise: All A is B; All mammals are warm-blooded. Minor premise: All C is A; All black dogs are mammals. Conclusion: therefore all C is B Therefore, all black dogs are warm-blooded.

KEY TERMS In the Argument form we put 'H' for 'human' and 'humans', 'M' for 'mortal', and 'S' for 'Socrates'; what results is the form of the original argument.   Argument Form Syllogism Major premise: All H are M; All humans are mortal. Minor premise: S is H Socrates is human. Conclusion: therefore all S is M Therefore, Socrates is mortal

KEY TERMS What is the argument form to the syllogism below? Major premise: All mammals are warm-blooded. Minor premise: All black dogs are mammals. Conclusion: Therefore, all black dogs are warm-blooded.

KEY TERMS What is the argument form to the syllogism below? Major premise: All M are W All mammals are warm-blooded. Minor premise: All B are M All black dogs are mammals. Conclusion: Therefore; all B are W Therefore, all black dogs are warm-blooded.