Home > Preview
The flashcards below were created by user
on FreezingBlue Flashcards.
What is Logic about?
Evaluating arguments and determining good reasoning.
What are arguments?
A list of statements for convincing.
Validity is one such that if its premise were true then the conclusion would also be true.
What makes an argument sound?
True premise and validity.
Give an example of a sound argument.
- All apples are fruit.
- All fruits come from plants.
- All apples come from plants.
Give an example of a valid but unsound argument.
- All nails are screws.
- All screws are oranges.
- All nails are oranges.
What is the logical form of the argument:
1. All students are cheaters.
2. All cheaters are people who deserve to go to prison.
3.Therefore, all students are people who deserve to go to prison.
- All A's are B's.
- All B's are C's.
- All A's are C's.
Use a Euler diagram to test argument from question 7 for validity.
- It's valid because the premises are true.
What is propositional logic?
Variables are replaced by statements.
What is categorical logic?
Variables are replaced by groups of things.
What are fallacies?
Mistakes in reasoning. If there are no other theories to explain an observation, then you must accept one from a small representative sample.
Give an example of a good inductive argument.
- At the store are a bunch of shirts.
- All the other shirts we've seen are a result of intellegent design.
- The shirts at the store are the result of intellegent design.
What is abductive reasoning?
Abductive reasoning is inference to the best explanation.
What is the belief of Agnostics?
Agnostics neither believe that God exists or doesn't exist.
Explain the birthday fallacy.
When a premise uses words to describe "at least one" but the conclusion uses words that conclude "only one".
What are cosmological arguments?
Arguments that suggest that God is the source of the Universe.
According to Plaley, in what way are watches and living organisms alike?
Watches are complex and good at their job, therefore are the result of intellegent design. Organisms are good at their job and are also the result of intellegent design.
Explain one of Hume's criticisms of Paleys argument.
- Hume declares Paley's argument a bad analogy because right away you identify it as a watch.
- He also believes the argument to have weak inductions.
- There isn't a large sample of complex organisms.
- And watches are not complex organisms.
What is the random explanation for the complexity of organisms?
- natural selection
- selection pressure
- all life is related
What characteristics do Jews, Muslims, and Christians typicallt attribute to God?
That God is the all powerfull, all knowing, and all good, creator of the universe.
What features make for a good inductive argument?
A large representative sample as well as the unbiasness of the sample.
evaluating arguments/ determining good reasoning
nature of what is real vs. illusion. (breaking it down)
value theory (ethics) evaluating behaviors and asthetics.
theory of knowledge
What are the four central philisophical problems?
knowlewdge we never have.
the mind and the brain are different things.
clashes of opinion
facts about physics.
the philisophical thesis that there are no ethical facts, only ethical opinions.
the action you perform in a situation is the one that will produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of individuals.
In distinguishing philosophy, what are the three theories toward the characteristics of philisophic questions?
- fundamental questions of justification
- philosophy is the enterprise of clarifying concepts. (What is...?)
- beliefs that arew second nature to us.
- our senses provide us knowledge of the world we inhabit.
- people act with their own free will.
What do philosophy questions ask?
"Philosophy questions ask why should you believe anything at all outside your mind?"
the idea that your mind is the only thing that exists.
What does philosophy address?
"Philosophy addresses the most fundamental beliefs we have about oursleves and the world we inhabit."
giving or identifying reasons for belonging or doing/ trying to pick out one truth to validate the first reason.
What are the three kinds of reasoning?
- 1. Deduction
- 2. Induction
- 3. Production
What are the two categories good arguments can be divided into?
- Not deductively valid
- Deductively valid
If is premises were true, its conclusion would have o be true.
T or F: A valid argument can have false premises and a false conclusion.
It begs the question.
- Lemons are yellow.
- Lemons are yellow.
Does validity only pertain to arguments?
Is this argumet valid?
All dobermans are dogs.
All dogs are animals.
All dogs are animals.
No. The variables are repetitive instead of showing relation.
- All A's are B's.
- All C's are A's.
- All C's are B's.
Katherine Example Method
- All A's are B's.
- No C's are B's.
- No C's are A's.
(propsition logic which is invalid because of true premises and false conclusion.)
identifying that members of a sample group have certain characteristics and concluding "because of this, the similar things otside the group have the same characteristics."
a sample representing what you are talking about.
Example of Inductive Inference
- 60% of the people called say they are democrats.
- approximately 60% of the voters in the country are democrats.
- measure of degree/ stronger or week according to the...
- sample size
- unbiasness of the sample
claim based on observations; predictions and generalizations from a large representative sample.
All inductive arguments are invalid. T or F
theoretical explanation of why something happened and not claiming it will happen again.
Failed Prediction Theory
- If T, then P
- Not P
- Not T
find evidence that strongly discriminates between two hypothesis
shows when an observation strongly favors one hypothesis over another.
an observation O strongly supports H1 over H2 if both the following conditions are satisfied.
The surprise principle suggests that among the true predictions...
...there should be predictions we shouldn't expect to come true to make a good abductive agument.
(mistake in reasoning)
If there are no other theories to explain an observation, you must accept an implausible one.
inference to the best explanation; attempting to explain what one observes. (circumstantial evidence)
An example of abductive reasoning.
- Everything outside is wet.
- It rained.
What did St. Thomas Aquinas (1200 A.D.) contribute to Philosophy?
5 ways of knowing Gods existence.
What was St. Thomas Aquinas' first argument?
- Argument for Knowing God Exists
1. Things are in motion.
- 2. If something is in motion, then it was set in motion by something outside itself.
- 3. There can be no infinite chain of movement.
- 4. There must be first an unmoved mover, and "this is God." ("not valid")
What was St. Thomas Aquinas 2nd Argument?
Argument for Causation if God Exists
- 1. Events happen.
- 2. If an event happens, then it was caused to happen by something outside itself.
- 3. There can be no infinite chains of causes.
- 4. There must be a first uncaused cause, and "this is God". ("not valid")
Aquinas argument conclusion is a fallacy because...
...There must be "a" ("at least one") first uncaused cause, and "this is God" ("only one")
Aquinas' Third Argument
Contigency: The observation that contingent (unnecessary) things exist.
Aquinas' Fourh Argument
Argument from Degree
- 1. Things have characteristics to a greater or lesser degree.
- 2. If something has a characteristic to a lesser degree, then there is something else that has the characteristic to the maximum possible degree.
- 3. There is something that has all characteristics to the maximum possible degree, and this is God.
(better argument but gives God too many characteristics; all PKG - all WIE)
Aquinas' Fifth Argument
Argument from Design
- 1. Of things that have a purpose, some have minds and some don't.
- 2. If something has a purpose but does not have a mind, then it was designed by a thing with a mind.
- 3. There is something that designed all mindless objects with puroses, and this is God.
- x was designed
- y was designed
- z was designed
- then x,y,z was designed by God.
Paleys Design Argument for Gods existence.
- 1. This object is complex and good at the job of keeping time.
- 2. This object is the result of intellegent design.
- 1. Living organisms are good at the job of surviving and reproducing.
- 2. Living organisms are the result of intellegent design.
What is wrong with Paleys Design Argument?
He's comparing things that shouldn't be compared.
Hume's (scottish philosopher) take on Paleys Design Argument
- 1.Right away you identify it as a watch.
- 2. A friend asks, "What is this?" which Hume replies, "I've seen other watches and they are the resul of intellegent design."
- 3. "This object is the result of intellegent design."
- 1.Here on Earth is a bunch of living organisms.
- 2. All the other living organisms we've seen are a result of intellegent design.
- 3. The living organisms here on Earth are the result of intellegent design.
(we haven't observed organisms of intellegent design)
- Random hypothesis:waves crashing on the beach for millions of years designed it.
- Design hypothesis: It was designed by someone intellegent.
Random explanation of living organisms and their ability to reproduce.
adaption to the envioronment due to threatening causes.
Common Cause Principle
(abductive reasonings) similar things have the same source.
Blaise Pascals Argument
"It is rational to believe in God."
What was Pascals wager?
What is the problem with Pascals argument?
- People don't believe things because of the benefits of believing.
- You can't force belief, you can only pretend belief.
- This wager will work for conflicting stories which requires contradictory belief.
Who is St. Anselm?
Attempts to prove that God exists merely from the defining of God
St. Anselms argument:
- God= the greatest conceivable being. (can't imagine anything greater)
- Fool= "God does not exist in reality, but only in the minds of men." (false)
- "The greatest conceivable being does not exist in reality, but only in the minds of men." (the greatest conceivable being is not the greatest conceivable being)
- something that exists in reality is greater than that which exists only in the mind.
Counter Example Method
est for invalidity
How did Gaunilorespond to Anselms argument?
He used the counter example method and replaced God with th Perfect Island.
Anselm counterbacked saying his argument only worked on God.
Problem of Evil by Epicurus
- 1. If God exists, then an all PKG being exists.
- 2. If an all PKG being exists, there would be no evil in the world.
- 3. There is evil in the world.
- 4. God doesn't exist.
- If P, then Q
- If Q, then R
- Not R
- Not P
the attempt to show that God an evil can coexist
- 1. natural evil
- 2. human evil
Free will defense
We decide to do bad things
Soul building evil
some suffering builds character and makes us appreciate God and brings us closer to him.