Time 2 hr No choice 1st six week course will be for the paper (including teasers) The 1st six week outlines attached in form of slides.

Philosophy: Philo: Love Sophia: Wisdom/Knowledge Knowledge: “Is justified belief” Knowing is not knowing but knowing with justification is knowledge Wisdom: “Doing Right things by following the right procedures” There is always exact right way but to dig out that and follow is Wisdom

A. Real: 1.Mind(spiritual soul) Matter (Matter of world) 2.Freedom: Free (Responsible) Not-free (No-responsibility) 3.God(Do we have good reason to believe in God), (Do we need reasons to believe in God). 4.World: Random accidental/ Teleology (purpose) B. Value: Human gives value on basis of discipline (pic of mother), (political leader) C: Truth: Reasons, Observation, Authority, Revelation, Intuition (sudden apprehension of reality).

LOGIC Human is thinking machine. Human thinks and those thoughts are than interlinked through interconnectivity. The thoughts are than communicated in form of words through different languages. Language is tool of communication but not a very good tool of communication because words are used in language which itself have no meanings but we assign different meanings to different words. Thus words used in communication can be emotionally charged, vague, ambiguous which is hindrance in communication. The thoughts are than through words in different languages are discussed in form of arguments for interlinking the idea and it develops into reasoning. Reasoning is a faculty which collect and connect set of information. The set of information interconnected gives inferences. Reasoning starts when thoughts get form of words and interpreted in different languages, which lead to exchange of arguments. Having faculty is one thing but exercising faculty is the other quality, which is one of the quality of human and it lead to arguments, reasoning, ultimately to applied form of LOGIC.

Logic: Logic is the study of the methods and principle used to distinguish correct reasoning from incorrect reasoning. Logic differentiates what will persuade people to accept an argument from what should persuade people to accept an argument. Logic is the method or techniques used to differentiate a good argument /correct reasoning from a bad argument/ wrong reasoning.

Argument: Thoughts when put into words of different languages it becomes arguments. But words itself having no meaning rather we assign different meanings to words in such a way that same word is having different meaning in different context. Thus words/ arguments/ situation should be treated in frame of their contexts. e.g.Father saying good to child having definition of good in scientific improvement Father saying good to child having definition of good in religious improvement. Which means Good use for good scientist and also good means Good religious person. e.g. Mountain Top is best for A: Memory B: Greenery C: Church Thus the word BEST for A,B,C is having different meanings.

Argument Having Two Main Things: 1.Form of Argument: Internal structure of argument 2.Context of Argument: What is inside of the argument

Argument: Argument is set of proposition/statements in which one statement is claimed to be followed by other proposition. The proposition which is claimed to be followed by other proposition is known as conclusion; that is the inference of argument. The other proposition which provides grounds for conclusion is known as premises. A=Bpremises B =Cpremises A=CConclusion

Enthymeme An argument in which the major premise is left unstated (often a conclusion supported by a single premise). She must be a good student since she is on the Dean’s List. Conclusion Minor Premise She must be a good student since she is on the Dean’s List. Major Premise? All good students are on the Dean’s List.

Types of Logic: 1.Formal Deductive Logic: In this form of logic we convert the propositions/statements into formal form of symbols and than test argument because ordinary language have pitfalls so better to translate the argument into formal form 2.Informal Logic: In this form of logic we don’t translate the argument into formal form but check it in its original form i.e. the content of the argument is tested.

Types of Argument: 1. Deductive: Premises provides conclusive/ evidential grounds for conclusions. Socrates is a man.Premise All men are mortal.Premise Socrates is mortal. Conclusion a. Premises provides complete grounds for conclusion. Premises provided are true the conclusion must be true. b. Either valid (if premises provide complete grounds) or invalid (if premises not provides complete grounds). c. From generalization move towards particularization.

2. Inductive:(Probable grounds for conclusion.) Product 1 of company A profitable Product 2 of company A profitable Product 3 of company A profitable All products of company A profitable Premises provides probable grounds for conclusion Can be less or more probable From particularization to generalization.

(You cannot think unless you think) Task 1: Prsentation of 5 slides to eleborate the topic Human is differentiated from other species on basis of thinking (Collecting and Connecting)

Deductive And Inductive (Validity and Soundness ) (Strength and Cogency) Validity: Assume its premises are true (whether they are or not), and see if the conclusion follows forth from it falsely. If it does, then the argument is invalid. If not, then it passes the test and is valid. “All automakers are computer manufacturers. (False, but assumed true) “All automakers are computer manufacturers. (False, but assumed true) United Airlines is an automaker. (False, but assumed true) United Airlines is an automaker. (False, but assumed true) Therefore, United Airlines is a computer manufacturer” (True, if the premises are true) (True, if the premises are true) Sound Argument: A sound argument is a deductive argument that is valid and has all true premises. Soundness: (Valid) + (True premises) (Not only assume but in reality are true) Validity depends on whether an argument’s premises support its conclusion. In valid arguments, the premises do support the conclusion. In invalid arguments, the premises don’t. Inductive Argument’s Strength: Assume the premises are true, and see if the conclusion is probably true. “All dinosaur bones discovered to this day have been at least 50 million years. Therefore, probably the next dinosaur bone to be found will be at least 50 million years old” The premise is true and lead to a conclusion that is probably true, so it’s a strong argument. “When a lighted match stick is slowly dipped into water, the flame is snuffed out. But petrol is a liquid, just like water. Therefore, when a lighted match is slowly dunked into petrol, the flame will be snuffed out” In this argument, the premises are true, but the conclusion is false. Thus, it is not difficult to assume the premises to be true. We merely check to see if they support the conclusion. We find they do not, so the argument is weak.

Cogency: An inductive argument is said to be cogent when it is both strong and has all true premises. Cogency: (Strong) + (True premises) A cogent argument is considered to be the ideal “good” inductive argument. (Not only assume but in reality are true) Cogency: An inductive argument is said to be cogent when it is both strong and has all true premises. Cogency: (Strong) + (True premises) A cogent argument is considered to be the ideal “good” inductive argument. (Not only assume but in reality are true) Truth or falsity when testing an argument (validity or strength) are relevant, but only to an extent. First you must assume the premises are true, and check to see if the conclusion is well supported. If it is well supported, then the argument is valid (deductive) or strong (inductive).