Logic Notes - PHIL 10101

Card Set Information

Author:
broach13
ID:
231830
Filename:
Logic Notes - PHIL 10101
Updated:
2013-09-11 18:41:54
Tags:
Philosophy logic
Folders:

Description:
formal logick
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user broach13 on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. a claim that can be true or false
    statement
  2. T/F imperatives are statements
    F
  3. T/F exclamations are statements
    F
  4. T/F Interrogatives are statements
    F
  5. property of statements which are the case
    truth
  6. property of statements which are not the case
    falsity
  7. a set of two or more interconnected statements
    argument
  8. statements which are used to prove a position
    premises
  9. the statement that results from a set of premises
    conclusion
  10. the process of reasoning from premises to conclusions
    inference
  11. the study of arguments
    logic
  12. what makes an argument good? (2)
    • 1. premises are true
    • 2. premises must be related convincingly to the conclusion
  13. T/F there are subtypes of inference
    T
  14. arguments in which the truth of the premises ideally provide a guarantee of the conclusion's truth.
    deductive
  15. T/F deductive arguments can say more than what was present in their premises
    F
  16. a deductive argument of 2 premises and a conclusion
    syllogism
  17. statements asserting relationships between or within classes or groups of things
    categorical statement
  18. T/F most categorical arguments contain all/none/some/etc
    T
  19. statement in which either one or the other component is asserted true
    disjunctive
  20. T/F disjunctive statements usually have either/or
    T
  21. statements containing a hypothetical
    conditional
  22. two parts of a conditional statement
    given P: antecedent (if P) and consequent (then Q)
  23. 2 properties of good deductive arguments
    validity and soundness
  24. conditions for validity:
    iff premises T, then conclusions T
  25. T/F an argument is valid if it is impossible that using valid premises provides a false conclusion
    T
  26. T/F validity depends on the actual content of the argument
    F (only structure)
  27. 2 common forms of valid argument
    modus ponens and modus tollens
  28. "the way that affirms via affirming"
    modus ponens
  29. Structure of a modus ponens argument
    • 1. If P, then Q.
    • 2. P exists
    • -> Q.
  30. T/F affirming the consequent is a valid argument
    F
  31. form of an "affirming the consequent" argument
    • 1. If P, then Q
    • 2. Q
    • -> P (invalid)
  32. "the way that denies via denying"
    modus tollens
  33. form of modus tollens argument:
    • 1. If P, then Q.
    • 2. Not Q.
    • -> not P
  34. synonym for modus tollens
    denying the consequent
  35. T/F denying the antecedent is a valid argument
    F
  36. structure of denying the antecedent
    • 1. If P, then Q
    • 2. Not P.
    • -> Not Q.
  37. validity + true premises
    sound argument
  38. T/F validity and true premises do not guarantee true conclusions
    F
  39. T/F arguments can be valid but not sound
    T
  40. T/F validity and soundness can refer to statements
    F
  41. an argument that reiterates the truth or falsity of a single statement
    tautology
  42. T/F tautology is a valid argument
    T
  43. T/F tautology is a sound argument
    T
  44. T/F tautology is a good argument
    F
  45. T/F If P, then Q, and given Q necessarily implies P.
    F
  46. logical defect in an argument
    fallacy
  47. T/F if an argument is fallacious, its premises do not decisively support its conclusion
    T
  48. T/F fallacies include false statements
    F
  49. T/F fallacies include bad reasoning
    T
  50. 2 categories of fallacy
    formal and informal
  51. defect in the structure of an argument
    formal fallacy
  52. examples of formal fallacy
    denying the antecedent, affirming the consequent
  53. T/F inductive arguments can also be formally fallacious
    T (they can be weaker then they claim)
  54. fallacy not attributable to form
    informal
  55. conclusion is derived from premises that presuppose its own truth
    begging the question
  56. other names for begging the question (4)
    circular reasoning, vicious circle, circulus in probando, petito principii
  57. argument which paraphrases the premises in the conclusion
    begging the question
  58. Type of argument:
    If God exists, then the Bible is His word
    God exists
    The bible is the word of God 
    If the bible is the word of God, God exists
    -> God exists.
    begging
  59. argument based on premises irrelevant to the argument's conclusion
    argumentum ad hominem
  60. other name for ad hominem
    fallacy of personal attack
  61. 2 kinds of ad hominem
    abusive (qualities of the person), circumstantial (circumstances)
  62. T/F ad hominem arguments are only fallacious if they're negative
    F
  63. T/F if the quality of the person in question is a premise in the argument, then the argument is not ad hominem
    T
  64. T/F it's fallacious to doubt the plausibility of someone's testimony regarding a claim even if we accept the claim itself
    False. It's perfectly acceptable to wonder if there are ulterior motives.
  65. argument which hinges on ambiguous terms
    fallacy of equivocation. These are usually jokes or wordplay regarding alternate meanings
  66. argument which depends upon ambiguous phrasing (e.g. misplaced modifiers)
    amphiboly
  67. argument which causally connects A -> B-> C -> D -> ... Z without supporting any of the links in between
    slippery slope
  68. T/F all long causal arguments are slippery-slope
    F
  69. argument which relies upon someone's "expert" testimony
    argument from authority
  70. other name for argument from authority
    argumentum ad verecundiam
  71. T/F all arguments from authority are fallacious
    F
  72. T/F if argument from authority is unnecessary, the argument is weakened
    T
  73. T/F if there is no authority on a subject, then argument from authority is still valid
    F
  74. T/F Bias can weaken an argument from authority
    T
  75. T/F holding decidedly non-mainstream positions increases the probability that the argument is weak
    T
  76. arguments which attempt to (dis)prove statements from the fact that there is no evidence for/against it
    argument from ignorance
  77. other name for argument from ignorance
    argumentum ad ignorantium
  78. T/F scientific research often relies on the argument from ignorance
    T
  79. fallacy which requires that option A be the only possibility because it is the only option we know of
    Only Game in Town Fallacy
  80. T/F it's fallacious to assume that an argument containing a fallacy produces a false conclusion
    T

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview