SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Homework from last time: 2. Another old SNL skit featured a newscaster saying, “In this country, a woman gives birth every 12 minutes.  She must be found and stopped.”  Explain the  ambiguity  in the newscaster’s first sentence.
Homework from last time: 4. At the movie theater, the ushers try to make sure that no children attend movies with R ratings unless accompanied by an adult parent or guardian.  Children ages 2-12 pay one ticket price, and everyone older than 12 pays the adult ticket price.  Discuss what is  vague  about “children” and “adult” here (at least as far as the ushers are concerned).  How could a 14-year-old use this vagueness to argue that he should be admitted to an R-rated movie?
Homework from last time: 5.  Explain what’s wrong with each of these lexical definitions: “ Hamster” means “a small animal.” e.  “Overture” means “the orchestral opening to the symphony.”
Homework from last time: 6. Discuss the  persuasive force  of “natural medicines” and of “evidence-based medicine.”  Describe the categories these terms pick out.  (Are they completely distinct categories?)
Homework from last time: 7.  Give a  verbal extensional definition  for “the five senses”. Discuss the limits of this definition (e.g., in conveying information to someone who doesn’t already have a clear understanding of what sense are).
Homework from last time: 8.  For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in  emotive force  between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same  intensional meaning  (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): i.  House – home Estate tax – death tax
Homework from last time: 8.  For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in  emotive force  between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same  intensional meaning  (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): k. College – university l.  Psychiatrist – shrink
Homework from last time: 8.  For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in  emotive force  between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same  intensional meaning  (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): m. Woman – lady Tolerance – “anything goes”
Homework from last time: 8.  For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in  emotive force  between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same  intensional meaning  (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): o.  Undocumented immigrant – illegal immigrant p.  Tuition payer -- student
Homework from last time: 9.  Formulate an  operational definition  for “hot” in “This jalapeño is hot.”
Deductive and Inductive Arguments Phil 57 section 3 San Jose State University Fall 2010
Arguments: Include at least one claim that is a  conclusion , plus one or more other claims ( premises ) that offer support for the conclusion. Arguments make a  factual  claim (that the premises are true) and an  inferential  claim (that the premises support the conclusion)
Arguments: form vs. content. To assess the inferential claim (the premises lead logically to the conclusion), need to look at the  form  of the argument, not the content.
Arguments: form vs. content. (a)  If taxes increase, them inflation will increase. Taxes will increase. Thus, inflation will increase. (b)  If I drink coffee after 8 PM, I have a hard time getting to sleep.   I drank coffee after 8 PM. So, I had a hard time getting to sleep.
Arguments: form vs. content. If P, then Q. P Therefore, Q. (Same pattern of reasoning, even though the specific claims P and Q are different.)
Arguments: form vs. content. (c)  All beans are legumes. All legumes are high in dietary fiber. Thus, all beans are high in dietary fiber. (d)  All birds are animals.   All animals are mammals. So, all birds are mammals.
Arguments: form vs. content. All A are B. All B are C Therefore, all A are C. (Same pattern of reasoning, even though the specific claims A, B, and C are different.)
Arguments: form vs. content. To work out the logical form of the argument, assign letters for the specific claims, leaving just the logical phrases. If the  logical form  of an argument is good (i.e., premises really do support conclusion), it’s good no matter what the content of the argument.
Validity An argument is  valid  when, if its premises are true, it is impossible for its conclusion to be false. (Arguments (a), (b), (c), and (d) are all valid.) Validity is a  formal  property of the argument. (Depends on form, not content)
Soundness An argument is  sound  when it is valid  and  when all of its premises are true. (Arguments (b) and (c) are sound; (a) might be sound, (d) is not sound.) Soundness depends on both the form (because the argument must be valid)  and  the content (because the premises must be true).
Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles.
Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles. If P, then Q P Thus, Q
Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles. If P, then Q P Thus, Q (valid)
Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles. If P, then Q P Thus, Q (valid) But premises are false (not sound)
Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals.
Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals. If P, then Q Q Thus, P
Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals. If P, then Q Q Thus, P (not a valid pattern!)
Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals. If P, then Q Q Thus, P (not a valid pattern!) If invalid, can’t be sound.
Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals.
Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals. Premise clearly supports conclusion. (valid)
Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals. Premise clearly supports conclusion. (valid) Premise is true. (sound)
Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals. Premise clearly supports conclusion. (valid) Premise is true. (sound) But, it’s a  circular argument . (Premise is the same as the conclusion)
Because validity is a  formal  property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a false conclusion. All squares are triangles. All triangles are circles. Thus, all squares are circles.
Because validity is a  formal  property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a false conclusion. All squares are triangles. All triangles are circles. Thus, all squares are circles. All A are B All B are C Thus, all A are C.
Because validity is a  formal  property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a true conclusion. All squares are circles. All circles are rectangles. Thus, all squares are rectangles.
Because validity is a  formal  property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a true conclusion. All squares are circles. All circles are rectangles. Thus, all squares are rectangles. All A are B All B are C Thus, all A are C.
Because validity is a  formal  property of an argument: But, when the logical form is valid, if premises are true, conclusion  must  be true!
Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles.
Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles. Premises, conclusion are true.
Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles. Premises, conclusion are true. But not a valid argument.
Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles. Premises, conclusion are true. But not a valid argument. All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!)
How to recognize a bad pattern: All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!)
How to recognize a bad pattern: All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!) Find content (A, B, C) that makes premises true but conclusion false.
How to recognize a bad pattern: All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!) Find content (A, B, C) that makes premises true but conclusion false. All cats are animals. All dogs are animals. All cats are dogs.
Deductive vs. inductive arguments: The valid arguments we’ve been discussing are  deductive  arguments.  ( If premises are true, conclusion  must  be true. ) There are some arguments where premises  support  conclusion but do not guarantee that it’s true. ( Inductive  arguments.)
An inductive argument: Last time I went to the beach, I got a sunburn and an ear-ache. The time before that when I went to the beach, I got a sunburn and an ear-ache. Thus ( probably ) next time I go to the beach I will get a sunburn and an ear-ache.
Homework: 1.  Explain the difference between the  form  of an argument and the  content  of an argument, using an example in your explanation.
Homework: 2.  Define a  valid argument .  Is validity a formal property of an argument or a content based property of an argument?
Homework: 3.  Define a  sound argument .  Is soundness a formal property of an argument or a content based property of an argument?
Homework: 4. Explain why a sound argument cannot have a false conclusion. (Your explanation can take the form of an argument involving the definitions of validity and soundness.)
Homework: 5. Give an example of a valid argument whose premises are actually false and whose conclusion is actually true.
Homework: 6.  Define an  invalid argument .
Homework: 7.  Can a valid argument have all its premises be actually true and its conclusion be actually false?
Homework: 8.  Give an example of an argument that is both valid and sound but is still not persuasive.
Homework: 9.  Recall that arguments make both  factual claims  (that the premises are true) and  inferential claims  (that the premises support the conclusion).  Which of these claims are false in an invalid argument?  In a valid argument that is unsound?
Homework: 10.  Define an  inductive argument .  Explain how the inferential claim made by an inductive argument differs from that of a deductive argument.

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

PPTX
Logic Reasoning
marverbolonia
 
PPTX
LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
tagupaleomark
 
PPT
Deduction vs. Induction
Robert Allen
 
PPT
Inductive and deductive reasoning
Abir Chaaban
 
DOCX
Notes for logic
Amit Chaudhary
 
PPT
1.2 Recognizing Arguments
Nicholas Lykins
 
PPTX
proposition, types and difference between proposition and sentence
zainulla
 
PPTX
Critical Thinking Skills - Arguments
Hanis Razak
 
DOCX
Fallacy of ambiguity, kinds of ambiguity , emotively neutral language, kinds ...
AMIR HASSAN
 
PPTX
Distribution of terms
Megha Gupta
 
PPTX
Symbolism And Diagram for Categorical Proposition
Syeda Hadiqa Zehra Rizvi
 
PDF
Basic Concepts of Logic
Ariadne Cara Santos, RPm
 
PDF
Argument
Timothy Scott
 
PPTX
Types of Argument presentation
Awais Ali
 
PPTX
Chapter 4 logical reasoning
Jaypee Sidon
 
PPTX
Logical fallacies
Donna Luna
 
PDF
Dilemma in Logic
Mah Noor
 
PPT
Logical fallacies powerpoint
Aimee Hoover-Miller
 
PPT
Inductive vs deductive reasoning
Baasansuren Naranbaatar
 
Logic Reasoning
marverbolonia
 
LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
tagupaleomark
 
Deduction vs. Induction
Robert Allen
 
Inductive and deductive reasoning
Abir Chaaban
 
Notes for logic
Amit Chaudhary
 
1.2 Recognizing Arguments
Nicholas Lykins
 
proposition, types and difference between proposition and sentence
zainulla
 
Critical Thinking Skills - Arguments
Hanis Razak
 
Fallacy of ambiguity, kinds of ambiguity , emotively neutral language, kinds ...
AMIR HASSAN
 
Distribution of terms
Megha Gupta
 
Symbolism And Diagram for Categorical Proposition
Syeda Hadiqa Zehra Rizvi
 
Basic Concepts of Logic
Ariadne Cara Santos, RPm
 
Argument
Timothy Scott
 
Types of Argument presentation
Awais Ali
 
Chapter 4 logical reasoning
Jaypee Sidon
 
Logical fallacies
Donna Luna
 
Dilemma in Logic
Mah Noor
 
Logical fallacies powerpoint
Aimee Hoover-Miller
 
Inductive vs deductive reasoning
Baasansuren Naranbaatar
 

Viewers also liked (20)

PPTX
Inductive, Deductive, and Fallacies
Darnell Kemp
 
PPT
Introduction to inductive and deductive reasoning
rbangerter
 
PPTX
Deductive and inductive method of teching
Jhun Ar Ar Ramos
 
PDF
Logic
Aamir Waqas
 
PPTX
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning
Kirsten Mary Montes
 
PPTX
Inductive reasoning
BSEPhySci14
 
PPTX
Logic arguments and_fallacies
Erik Hanson
 
KEY
Inductive reasoning powerpoint
ahalter
 
PPTX
RESEARCH METHOD - SAMPLING
Hafizah Hajimia
 
PPT
Logical fallacy examples
Darnell Kemp
 
PPTX
Inductive argument
jimber0910
 
PPT
Boss2 ppt ch08
dborcoman
 
PPT
Boss2 ppt ch07
dborcoman
 
PPT
Phil115 1 Intro
guest55c847
 
PPT
5 2 t4e_chapter_fivepowerpoint
sagebennet
 
PPT
Introduction to Logic
Wasif Altaf
 
PPTX
Introduction to the Logic of Definitions
Barry Smith
 
PPTX
Chapter six
hisled
 
PDF
703 ICP: Ronald Nash, The Law of Non-Contradiction
Richard Chamberlain
 
PPTX
Netcloud - Business Card
NetCloudIsrael
 
Inductive, Deductive, and Fallacies
Darnell Kemp
 
Introduction to inductive and deductive reasoning
rbangerter
 
Deductive and inductive method of teching
Jhun Ar Ar Ramos
 
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning
Kirsten Mary Montes
 
Inductive reasoning
BSEPhySci14
 
Logic arguments and_fallacies
Erik Hanson
 
Inductive reasoning powerpoint
ahalter
 
RESEARCH METHOD - SAMPLING
Hafizah Hajimia
 
Logical fallacy examples
Darnell Kemp
 
Inductive argument
jimber0910
 
Boss2 ppt ch08
dborcoman
 
Boss2 ppt ch07
dborcoman
 
Phil115 1 Intro
guest55c847
 
5 2 t4e_chapter_fivepowerpoint
sagebennet
 
Introduction to Logic
Wasif Altaf
 
Introduction to the Logic of Definitions
Barry Smith
 
Chapter six
hisled
 
703 ICP: Ronald Nash, The Law of Non-Contradiction
Richard Chamberlain
 
Netcloud - Business Card
NetCloudIsrael
 
Ad

Similar to Deductive and Inductive Arguments (20)

PPTX
03. intro to argument, informal fallacies
Justin Morris
 
PPT
02b Well Formed Arguments
ATFyfe
 
PPTX
Lecture 2 - Nature and use of argument.pptx
sharmi28it
 
DOC
Intro logic ch 3 doc
temkin abdlkader
 
DOC
Intro logic ch 3 doc
temkin abdlkader
 
PPT
4.3 Venn Diagrams And The Modern Square Of Opposition
Nicholas Lykins
 
DOCX
Standard Form ArgumentsDiscussion TitleThe central tool of.docx
whitneyleman54422
 
PDF
Week 4.1 deductive & inductive reasoning
Dr. Russell Rodrigo
 
PDF
Logic
George Matthews
 
PDF
Argument Helping Students Understand What Essay Writing Is About
Rick Vogel
 
PPT
Inventing arguments chap 1 2
palderman
 
PDF
Midterm-Notes-Part-2.pdfujjiisisisjsjsisisosososkskkss
gleannicoleedu
 
PPTX
Teaching Argumentative Writing
Mary Ann Reilly / Blueprints for Learning, Inc.
 
DOCX
ArgumentsA. Arguments are found in many texts and media .docx
jewisonantone
 
DOCX
Deductive ReasoningmoodboardThinkstockLearning Objectives.docx
simonithomas47935
 
KEY
Argument notes
lmharaway
 
PDF
GMAT PREPARATION PRESENTATION SLIDES.pdf
EmilyVargas54
 
DOCX
How to Construct a Valid Main Argument 1. State your (tent.docx
adampcarr67227
 
PDF
Understanding arguments, reasoning and hypotheses
Maria Rosala
 
03. intro to argument, informal fallacies
Justin Morris
 
02b Well Formed Arguments
ATFyfe
 
Lecture 2 - Nature and use of argument.pptx
sharmi28it
 
Intro logic ch 3 doc
temkin abdlkader
 
Intro logic ch 3 doc
temkin abdlkader
 
4.3 Venn Diagrams And The Modern Square Of Opposition
Nicholas Lykins
 
Standard Form ArgumentsDiscussion TitleThe central tool of.docx
whitneyleman54422
 
Week 4.1 deductive & inductive reasoning
Dr. Russell Rodrigo
 
Argument Helping Students Understand What Essay Writing Is About
Rick Vogel
 
Inventing arguments chap 1 2
palderman
 
Midterm-Notes-Part-2.pdfujjiisisisjsjsisisosososkskkss
gleannicoleedu
 
Teaching Argumentative Writing
Mary Ann Reilly / Blueprints for Learning, Inc.
 
ArgumentsA. Arguments are found in many texts and media .docx
jewisonantone
 
Deductive ReasoningmoodboardThinkstockLearning Objectives.docx
simonithomas47935
 
Argument notes
lmharaway
 
GMAT PREPARATION PRESENTATION SLIDES.pdf
EmilyVargas54
 
How to Construct a Valid Main Argument 1. State your (tent.docx
adampcarr67227
 
Understanding arguments, reasoning and hypotheses
Maria Rosala
 
Ad

More from Janet Stemwedel (20)

PPT
Climategate and scientific methodology
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
P160 Kuhn and his Critics
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
P160 Duhem and Quine
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
P160 Hempel, Hume, Deduction, and Induction
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lect10 Human Subjects: History
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lect11 Human Subjects: Regulations
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lec12 Human Subjects:Global Issues
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lec13 Scientific Papers and Communications
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lec 14 Authorship Issues
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lec15 Patents and Intellectual Property
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Lec16 International Strategies for Scientific Dialogue
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Explanation classroomversion
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
P160 antirealismclassroomversion
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
P160 naturalismclassroomlect
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Feminist Critiques of Science
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Indirect-table Analysis
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Truth table analysis
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Translating English to Propositional Logic
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
P160 Kuhn classroom Lecture 2
Janet Stemwedel
 
PPT
Propositional logic
Janet Stemwedel
 
Climategate and scientific methodology
Janet Stemwedel
 
P160 Kuhn and his Critics
Janet Stemwedel
 
P160 Duhem and Quine
Janet Stemwedel
 
P160 Hempel, Hume, Deduction, and Induction
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lect10 Human Subjects: History
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lect11 Human Subjects: Regulations
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lec12 Human Subjects:Global Issues
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lec13 Scientific Papers and Communications
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lec 14 Authorship Issues
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lec15 Patents and Intellectual Property
Janet Stemwedel
 
Lec16 International Strategies for Scientific Dialogue
Janet Stemwedel
 
Explanation classroomversion
Janet Stemwedel
 
P160 antirealismclassroomversion
Janet Stemwedel
 
P160 naturalismclassroomlect
Janet Stemwedel
 
Feminist Critiques of Science
Janet Stemwedel
 
Indirect-table Analysis
Janet Stemwedel
 
Truth table analysis
Janet Stemwedel
 
Translating English to Propositional Logic
Janet Stemwedel
 
P160 Kuhn classroom Lecture 2
Janet Stemwedel
 
Propositional logic
Janet Stemwedel
 

Recently uploaded (20)

PPTX
Optimizing Cancer Screening With MCED Technologies: From Science to Practical...
i3 Health
 
PDF
IMP NAAC REFORMS 2024 - 10 Attributes.pdf
BHARTIWADEKAR
 
PPTX
Capitol Doctoral Presentation -July 2025.pptx
CapitolTechU
 
PDF
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ THEO LESSON TIẾNG ANH - I-LEARN SMART WORLD 7 - CẢ NĂM - CÓ ĐÁ...
Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
PPSX
HEALTH ASSESSMENT (Community Health Nursing) - GNM 1st Year
Priyanshu Anand
 
PDF
ARAL-Orientation_Morning-Session_Day-11.pdf
JoelVilloso1
 
PPTX
Nutri-QUIZ-Bee-Elementary.pptx...................
ferdinandsanbuenaven
 
PDF
DIGESTION OF CARBOHYDRATES,PROTEINS,LIPIDS
raviralanaresh2
 
PPTX
LEGAL ASPECTS OF PSYCHIATRUC NURSING.pptx
PoojaSen20
 
PPTX
HEAD INJURY IN CHILDREN: NURSING MANAGEMENGT.pptx
PRADEEP ABOTHU
 
PPTX
HYDROCEPHALUS: NURSING MANAGEMENT .pptx
PRADEEP ABOTHU
 
PPTX
Optimizing Cancer Screening With MCED Technologies: From Science to Practical...
i3 Health
 
PPTX
Explorando Recursos do Summer '25: Dicas Essenciais - 02
Mauricio Alexandre Silva
 
PPT
digestive system for Pharm d I year HAP
rekhapositivity
 
PPTX
A PPT on Alfred Lord Tennyson's Ulysses.
Beena E S
 
PPTX
2025 Winter SWAYAM NPTEL & A Student.pptx
Utsav Yagnik
 
PDF
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH 8 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - CẢ NĂM - NĂM 2024 (VOCABULARY, ...
Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
PDF
CEREBRAL PALSY: NURSING MANAGEMENT .pdf
PRADEEP ABOTHU
 
PPTX
How to Manage Access Rights & User Types in Odoo 18
Celine George
 
PPTX
Accounting Skills Paper-I, Preparation of Vouchers
Dr. Sushil Bansode
 
Optimizing Cancer Screening With MCED Technologies: From Science to Practical...
i3 Health
 
IMP NAAC REFORMS 2024 - 10 Attributes.pdf
BHARTIWADEKAR
 
Capitol Doctoral Presentation -July 2025.pptx
CapitolTechU
 
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ THEO LESSON TIẾNG ANH - I-LEARN SMART WORLD 7 - CẢ NĂM - CÓ ĐÁ...
Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
HEALTH ASSESSMENT (Community Health Nursing) - GNM 1st Year
Priyanshu Anand
 
ARAL-Orientation_Morning-Session_Day-11.pdf
JoelVilloso1
 
Nutri-QUIZ-Bee-Elementary.pptx...................
ferdinandsanbuenaven
 
DIGESTION OF CARBOHYDRATES,PROTEINS,LIPIDS
raviralanaresh2
 
LEGAL ASPECTS OF PSYCHIATRUC NURSING.pptx
PoojaSen20
 
HEAD INJURY IN CHILDREN: NURSING MANAGEMENGT.pptx
PRADEEP ABOTHU
 
HYDROCEPHALUS: NURSING MANAGEMENT .pptx
PRADEEP ABOTHU
 
Optimizing Cancer Screening With MCED Technologies: From Science to Practical...
i3 Health
 
Explorando Recursos do Summer '25: Dicas Essenciais - 02
Mauricio Alexandre Silva
 
digestive system for Pharm d I year HAP
rekhapositivity
 
A PPT on Alfred Lord Tennyson's Ulysses.
Beena E S
 
2025 Winter SWAYAM NPTEL & A Student.pptx
Utsav Yagnik
 
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH 8 - GLOBAL SUCCESS - CẢ NĂM - NĂM 2024 (VOCABULARY, ...
Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
CEREBRAL PALSY: NURSING MANAGEMENT .pdf
PRADEEP ABOTHU
 
How to Manage Access Rights & User Types in Odoo 18
Celine George
 
Accounting Skills Paper-I, Preparation of Vouchers
Dr. Sushil Bansode
 

Deductive and Inductive Arguments

  • 1. Homework from last time: 2. Another old SNL skit featured a newscaster saying, “In this country, a woman gives birth every 12 minutes. She must be found and stopped.” Explain the ambiguity in the newscaster’s first sentence.
  • 2. Homework from last time: 4. At the movie theater, the ushers try to make sure that no children attend movies with R ratings unless accompanied by an adult parent or guardian. Children ages 2-12 pay one ticket price, and everyone older than 12 pays the adult ticket price. Discuss what is vague about “children” and “adult” here (at least as far as the ushers are concerned). How could a 14-year-old use this vagueness to argue that he should be admitted to an R-rated movie?
  • 3. Homework from last time: 5. Explain what’s wrong with each of these lexical definitions: “ Hamster” means “a small animal.” e. “Overture” means “the orchestral opening to the symphony.”
  • 4. Homework from last time: 6. Discuss the persuasive force of “natural medicines” and of “evidence-based medicine.” Describe the categories these terms pick out. (Are they completely distinct categories?)
  • 5. Homework from last time: 7. Give a verbal extensional definition for “the five senses”. Discuss the limits of this definition (e.g., in conveying information to someone who doesn’t already have a clear understanding of what sense are).
  • 6. Homework from last time: 8. For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in emotive force between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same intensional meaning (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): i. House – home Estate tax – death tax
  • 7. Homework from last time: 8. For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in emotive force between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same intensional meaning (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): k. College – university l. Psychiatrist – shrink
  • 8. Homework from last time: 8. For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in emotive force between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same intensional meaning (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): m. Woman – lady Tolerance – “anything goes”
  • 9. Homework from last time: 8. For each of the following pairs of terms, identify whether there is a difference in emotive force between the members of the pair, and whether both members of each pair have the same intensional meaning (i.e., whether they refer to the same things): o. Undocumented immigrant – illegal immigrant p. Tuition payer -- student
  • 10. Homework from last time: 9. Formulate an operational definition for “hot” in “This jalapeño is hot.”
  • 11. Deductive and Inductive Arguments Phil 57 section 3 San Jose State University Fall 2010
  • 12. Arguments: Include at least one claim that is a conclusion , plus one or more other claims ( premises ) that offer support for the conclusion. Arguments make a factual claim (that the premises are true) and an inferential claim (that the premises support the conclusion)
  • 13. Arguments: form vs. content. To assess the inferential claim (the premises lead logically to the conclusion), need to look at the form of the argument, not the content.
  • 14. Arguments: form vs. content. (a) If taxes increase, them inflation will increase. Taxes will increase. Thus, inflation will increase. (b) If I drink coffee after 8 PM, I have a hard time getting to sleep. I drank coffee after 8 PM. So, I had a hard time getting to sleep.
  • 15. Arguments: form vs. content. If P, then Q. P Therefore, Q. (Same pattern of reasoning, even though the specific claims P and Q are different.)
  • 16. Arguments: form vs. content. (c) All beans are legumes. All legumes are high in dietary fiber. Thus, all beans are high in dietary fiber. (d) All birds are animals. All animals are mammals. So, all birds are mammals.
  • 17. Arguments: form vs. content. All A are B. All B are C Therefore, all A are C. (Same pattern of reasoning, even though the specific claims A, B, and C are different.)
  • 18. Arguments: form vs. content. To work out the logical form of the argument, assign letters for the specific claims, leaving just the logical phrases. If the logical form of an argument is good (i.e., premises really do support conclusion), it’s good no matter what the content of the argument.
  • 19. Validity An argument is valid when, if its premises are true, it is impossible for its conclusion to be false. (Arguments (a), (b), (c), and (d) are all valid.) Validity is a formal property of the argument. (Depends on form, not content)
  • 20. Soundness An argument is sound when it is valid and when all of its premises are true. (Arguments (b) and (c) are sound; (a) might be sound, (d) is not sound.) Soundness depends on both the form (because the argument must be valid) and the content (because the premises must be true).
  • 21. Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles.
  • 22. Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles. If P, then Q P Thus, Q
  • 23. Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles. If P, then Q P Thus, Q (valid)
  • 24. Validity and soundness If whales are insects, then humans are reptiles. Whales are insects. Thus, humans are reptiles. If P, then Q P Thus, Q (valid) But premises are false (not sound)
  • 25. Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals.
  • 26. Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals. If P, then Q Q Thus, P
  • 27. Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals. If P, then Q Q Thus, P (not a valid pattern!)
  • 28. Validity and soundness If humans are mammals, then whales are mammals. Whales are mammals. Thus, humans are mammals. If P, then Q Q Thus, P (not a valid pattern!) If invalid, can’t be sound.
  • 29. Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals.
  • 30. Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals. Premise clearly supports conclusion. (valid)
  • 31. Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals. Premise clearly supports conclusion. (valid) Premise is true. (sound)
  • 32. Is a sound argument always a good argument? All mammals are animals. Thus, all mammals are animals. Premise clearly supports conclusion. (valid) Premise is true. (sound) But, it’s a circular argument . (Premise is the same as the conclusion)
  • 33. Because validity is a formal property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a false conclusion. All squares are triangles. All triangles are circles. Thus, all squares are circles.
  • 34. Because validity is a formal property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a false conclusion. All squares are triangles. All triangles are circles. Thus, all squares are circles. All A are B All B are C Thus, all A are C.
  • 35. Because validity is a formal property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a true conclusion. All squares are circles. All circles are rectangles. Thus, all squares are rectangles.
  • 36. Because validity is a formal property of an argument: Can have valid argument with false premises and a true conclusion. All squares are circles. All circles are rectangles. Thus, all squares are rectangles. All A are B All B are C Thus, all A are C.
  • 37. Because validity is a formal property of an argument: But, when the logical form is valid, if premises are true, conclusion must be true!
  • 38. Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles.
  • 39. Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles. Premises, conclusion are true.
  • 40. Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles. Premises, conclusion are true. But not a valid argument.
  • 41. Consider this argument: All squares are polygons. All rectangles are polygons. Thus, all squares are rectangles. Premises, conclusion are true. But not a valid argument. All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!)
  • 42. How to recognize a bad pattern: All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!)
  • 43. How to recognize a bad pattern: All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!) Find content (A, B, C) that makes premises true but conclusion false.
  • 44. How to recognize a bad pattern: All A are C All B are C Thus, all A are B (NOT a valid pattern!) Find content (A, B, C) that makes premises true but conclusion false. All cats are animals. All dogs are animals. All cats are dogs.
  • 45. Deductive vs. inductive arguments: The valid arguments we’ve been discussing are deductive arguments. ( If premises are true, conclusion must be true. ) There are some arguments where premises support conclusion but do not guarantee that it’s true. ( Inductive arguments.)
  • 46. An inductive argument: Last time I went to the beach, I got a sunburn and an ear-ache. The time before that when I went to the beach, I got a sunburn and an ear-ache. Thus ( probably ) next time I go to the beach I will get a sunburn and an ear-ache.
  • 47. Homework: 1. Explain the difference between the form of an argument and the content of an argument, using an example in your explanation.
  • 48. Homework: 2. Define a valid argument . Is validity a formal property of an argument or a content based property of an argument?
  • 49. Homework: 3. Define a sound argument . Is soundness a formal property of an argument or a content based property of an argument?
  • 50. Homework: 4. Explain why a sound argument cannot have a false conclusion. (Your explanation can take the form of an argument involving the definitions of validity and soundness.)
  • 51. Homework: 5. Give an example of a valid argument whose premises are actually false and whose conclusion is actually true.
  • 52. Homework: 6. Define an invalid argument .
  • 53. Homework: 7. Can a valid argument have all its premises be actually true and its conclusion be actually false?
  • 54. Homework: 8. Give an example of an argument that is both valid and sound but is still not persuasive.
  • 55. Homework: 9. Recall that arguments make both factual claims (that the premises are true) and inferential claims (that the premises support the conclusion). Which of these claims are false in an invalid argument? In a valid argument that is unsound?
  • 56. Homework: 10. Define an inductive argument . Explain how the inferential claim made by an inductive argument differs from that of a deductive argument.