Chapter 3 Flashcards
Affirming the antecedent
See modus ponens
If P, then Q.
P is true.
Therefore, Q is true.
Affirming the consequent
+ is it valid or invalid
Invalid argument form :
If p then Q
Q.
Therefore P
Antecedent
The first part of a conditional statemetn (If p then q) the component that begins with the word If .
Cogent argument
A strong inductive argument with all true premises
Conditional statement
An “if then” statement ; it consists of the antecedent(the part introduced by the word if) and the consequent (the part introduced by the word then)
Consequent
The part of a conditional statement (If p then Q) introduced by the word then
Deductive argument
An argument intended to provide logically conlusive support for its conclusion
Denying the antecedent
+ is it valid or invalid argument form
An invalid argument form :
If P, then Q
Not P
Therefore, not Q
Denying the consequence
Denying the consequent aligns with modus tollens. Here’s the breakdown:
If P, then Q.
Q is not true.
Therefore, P is not true.
dependent premise
A premise that depends on at least one other premise to provide joint support to a conclusion. If a dependent premise is removed, the support that its linked depenent premises supply to the consluison is undermined or completly cancelled out
disjunctive syllogism
+ valid or invalid argument form
A Valid argument form :
Either P or Q
Not P
Therefore, Q
In the second premise of a syllogism. either disjunct (either of the parts separated by “or”) can be denied
Hypothethical syllogism
+ valid or invalid argument form
A valid argument made up of three hypothethical, or conditional statemtns :
If p, then q
If q then r
Therefore, if p then r
independent premise
A premise that does not depend on other premises to provide support to a conclusion. If an independent premise is removed, the support that other premises supply to the conclusion is not affected
inductive argument
an argument in which the premises are intended to provide probable, not conclusive, support for its conclusion
invalid argument
a deductive argument tht fails to provide conclusive support for its conclusion
Modus ponens (affirming the antecedent)
A valid argument form :
If p then q
P
Therefore q
modus tollens (denying the consequent )
a valid argument form
If p then q
Not q
Therefore not p
principle of charity
The interpretive principle that says that whenever we find someones meaning unclear,we should attempt to interpret it in a such a way as to make them make sense, rather than interpreting them as saying something silly or confused
sound argument
A deductively valid argument that has true premises
straw man
The fallacy of distorting, weakening, or oversimplifying someones position so it can be moer easily attacked or refuted
strong argument
an inductive argument that succeeeds in providing probable but not conclusive support for its conclusion
syllogism
a deductive argument made up of three statements- two premises and a conclusion
See modus ponens and modus tollens
truth preserving
a characteristic of a valid deductive argument in which the logical structure guarantees the truth of the conclusion if the premises are true
valid argument
a deducitve argument that suceeds in providing conclusive support for its conclusion
weak argument
an inductive argument that fails to provide strong support for its conclusion
