Evaluating Deductive Arguments

Slides:



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

Deductive Validity In this tutorial you will learn how to determine whether deductive arguments are valid or invalid. Go to next slide.
Formal Criteria for Evaluating Arguments
Part 2 Module 3 Arguments and deductive reasoning Logic is a formal study of the process of reasoning, or using common sense. Deductive reasoning involves.
Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.
1.4 Validity, Truth, Soundness, Strength and Cogency Goal: Learn the terms used to evaluate inductive and deductive arguments.
 Assertions: unsupported declaration of a belief  Prejudice: a view without evidence for or against  Premises: explicit evidence that lead to a conclusion.
Part 2 Module 3 Arguments and deductive reasoning Logic is a formal study of the process of reasoning, or using common sense. Deductive reasoning involves.
Deductive Validity In this tutorial you will learn how to determine whether deductive arguments are valid or invalid. Chapter 3.b.
Other Info on Making Arguments
Philosophy 120 Symbolic Logic I H. Hamner Hill CSTL-CLA.SEMO.EDU/HHILL/PL120.
Deduction and Induction
For Friday, read chapter 2, sections 1-2 (pp ). As nongraded homework, do the problems on p. 19. Graded homework #1 is due at the beginning of class.
LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
1 Arguments in Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy.
Part 2 Module 3 Arguments and deductive reasoning Logic is a formal study of the process of reasoning, or using common sense. Deductive reasoning involves.
DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
Basic Argumentation.
The ubiquity of logic One common example of reasoning  If I take an umbrella, I can prevent getting wet by rain  I don’t want to get myself wet by rain.
Chapter 4: Lecture Notes
Introduction to Philosophy
Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.
FALSE PREMISE.
Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning Consider the following two passages: Argument #1 Mr. Jones is a member of the Academy of Scholarly Fellows and only.
Chapter Three Truth Tables 1. Computing Truth-Values We can use truth tables to determine the truth-value of any compound sentence containing one of.
Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.
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.
Chapter 3: MAKING SENSE OF ARGUMENTS
READING #4 “DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS” By Robert FitzGibbons from Making educational decisions: an introduction to Philosophy of Education (New York & London:
Theory of Knowledge Ms. Bauer
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) All dogs have two heads. 2. All tigers are dogs. ___________________________________ 3. All tigers have two.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Proofs Rules of Inference Rules of Equivalence.
Philosophical Method  Logic: A Calculus For Good Reason  Clarification, Not Obfuscation  Distinctions and Disambiguation  Examples and Counterexamples.
RECOGNIZING, ANALYZING, AND CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENTS
The construction of a formal argument
Ethics 160 Moral Arguments. Reasons and Arguments Different claims have different uses in our language. Sometimes, a claim or claims are used as a reason.
Sentence (syntactically Independent grammatical unit) QuestionCommandStatement “This is a class in logic.” “I enjoy logic.” “Today is Friday.”
Propositions and Arguments. What is a proposition? A proposition is a predicative sentence that only contains a subject and a predicate S is P.
What is an argument? An argument is, to quote the Monty Python sketch, "a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition." Huh? Three.
© 2009 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.1 Chapters1 & 2.
Categorical Propositions Chapter 5. Deductive Argument A deductive argument is one whose premises are claimed to provide conclusive grounds for the truth.
Deductive Reasoning. Inductive: premise offers support and evidenceInductive: premise offers support and evidence Deductive: premises offers proof that.
Part One: Assessing the Inference, Deductive and Inductive Reasoning.
Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.
Deductive reasoning.
2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary
1.1 Arguments, Premises, and Conclusions
a valid argument with true premises.
WEEK 3 VALIDITY OF ARGUMENTS Valid argument: A deductive argument is valid if its conclusion is necessarily and logically drawn from the premises. The.
FALSE PREMISE.
Deductive Arguments.
Inductive / Deductive reasoning
Let’s play.
Testing for Validity with Venn Diagrams
Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams
Chapter 3 Philosophy: Questions and theories
Overview Philosophy & logic.
Introduction to Logic PHIL 240 Sections
Validity and Soundness
Inductive and Deductive Logic
Making Sense of Arguments
Concise Guide to Critical Thinking
6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments
8C Truth Tables, 8D, 8E Implications 8F Valid Arguments
Propositional Logic 1) Introduction Copyright 2008, Scott Gray.
ID1050– Quantitative & Qualitative Reasoning
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
Avoiding Ungrounded Assumptions
Presentation transcript:

Evaluating Deductive Arguments Chapter Five Evaluating Deductive Arguments

Validity Validity is one way to evaluate a deductive argument. A deductive argument is valid if, and only if, its premises entail its conclusion. There is entailment in an argument if, and only if, the truth of the argument’s premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion—in the sense that, if the premises are all true, the conclusion cannot be false.

Valid and Invalid Arguments Arguments may be divided into two groups: those that are valid and those that are invalid. Only valid arguments are truth-preserving; if their premises are true, then it is not possible for their conclusion to be false. Only in a valid argument do the premises entail the conclusion. A logical thinker who accepts the premises of a valid argument cannot reject its conclusion without contradiction. But this doesn’t happen in the case of an invalid argument.

Validity and Truth The validity of an argument is determined solely by consideration of its form and not the actual truth of the premises or the conclusion. Whether an argument is valid is entirely a matter of whether its conclusion follows necessarily from its premises. The truth of the premises and conclusion are irrelevant to validity.

Validity and Truth 1. All dogs are fish. A valid argument could have one or more false premises and a true conclusion, as in: 1. All dogs are fish. 2. All fish are mammals. ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Therefore, all dogs are mammals. A valid argument could also be made up entirely of false statements, as in: 1. All Democrats are vegetarians. 2. All vegetarians are Republicans. _________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Therefore, all Democrats are Republicans.

Validity and Argument Form An argument form is the type of logical pattern that a particular argument follows. The following is a valid argument form and any argument following this form would be valid. All A are B. All B are C. ___________________________________ 3. Some A are C. The following is an invalid argument form and any argument following this form would be invalid. Some C are B. ______________________________________ 3. Some C are A.

Technical Meaning of Validity The term valid can only apply to an argument whose premises necessitate or entail its conclusion. Statement are either true or false, but cannot be valid or invalid. Arguments cannot be true or false, but can be valid or invalid.

Propositional Argument Forms A proposition is the content of a belief or statement, which has truth value. Propositional Forms = arguments that have the characteristic of being truth-preserving because the statements that constitute their premises and conclusion form distinctive patterns of relationship that transfer the truth of the premises (if they are true) to the conclusion.

Valid Propositional Argument Forms

Categorical Argument Forms Categorical Argument Forms = arguments that have the characteristic of being truth-preserving because, within the statements that constitute their premises and conclusions, there are some expressions, usually called terms, which bear certain relationships to each other that make the arguments’ conclusions true if the premises are true.

Valid Categorical Argument Forms

Propositional or Categorical? Certain connections between propositions, such as “either . . . or . . .” and “if . . . then . . .” indicate that the argument is probably better constructed as propositional. Certain words within the premises indicating quantity, such as “all,” “no,” and “some” suggest that the argument is probably better constructed as categorical.

Cash Value of Validity It is not possible that the argument’s premises are true and its conclusion false. The conclusion could be false, if at least one of its premises is false. It is contradictory to accept a valid argument’s premises and reject its conclusion.

Soundness Validity is the first criterion in argument evaluation. The second criterion is soundness. An argument is sound if, and only if, it is valid and all of its premises are true. An argument is unsound if it lacks either validity, true premises, or both. Unsoundness is a reason to reject an argument even if it is valid. The conclusion of a sound argument is true. A sound argument’s conclusion cannot be rejected without saying something false.

Soundness

Cash Value of Soundness The argument’s conclusion is true; to deny it is to say something false. A logical thinker who recognizes an argument as sound must accept its conclusion.

Cogency A proposed argument has deductive cogency (or persuasiveness) when three conditions are met: recognizable validity acceptable premises premises that are more clearly acceptable than the conclusion

The Cash Value of Cogency Any argument that satisfies the conditions of cogency is rationally compelling, in the sense that it would move the thinker to accept its conclusion (provided she accepts its premises and works out its entailment). It would be irrational for a thinker to reject the conclusion of a cogent argument.