Final Exam Flashcards
WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?
- series of sentences in a reaction among each other
- has a conclusion( thesis)
- has premises
THESIS?
- what you are trying to prove or show
PREMISES?
- support or count in favour of the conclusion–> why is the conclusion true
Are remises and conclusions claims or proposition that are true or false?
they can be either
WHAT MAKES A GOOD ARGUMENT?
- validity
2. soundness
Validity?
- an argument is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false
(conclusion is right and premises are wrong. )
Soundness?
- an argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are all true.
Properties of an argument?
- soundness
2. validity
how to disagree with an author?
- show that what they are saying is invalid
2. show that at least one of the premises is false
good argument that aren’t valid?
- inductive argument
2. Abductive argument
Abductive arguments
- identifying a phenomenon that needs explaining, say P. We then offer what is taken to be best explanation, say Q. We then infer Q from P.
Inductive arguments
-conclusion of an inductive argument doesn’t follow from the premises, the truth of the premises makes the conclusion plausible.
what are good inductive arguments called?
cogent arguments
Principal of Charity?
- not attributing claims to authors that they would not hold
ARGUMENTATIVE FALLACIES?
- fallacy of equivocation
- begging the question
- proving too much
- ad Hominem arguments
- appeal to authority
- straw man arguments
- affirming the consequent
The fallacy of equivocation?
- Using key terms in different senses in different parts of the argument.
Begging the question?
-One begs the question (or is involved in circular reasoning) when one assumes what one is trying to prove (or assumes something which is very close to what one is trying to prove).
Proving too much?
- An argument proves too much if it is committed to a statement which has implications that are clearly false
Ad Hominen arguments?
- These arguments involve personal attacks on the person making the argument, or some other person, rather than providing reasoned objections to the argument itsel
Appeals to authority?
-never acceptable to ‘support’ your view by stating that some other philosopher, or anybody else for that matter, also held the same view.
“Straw man”arguments?
Representing your opponent’s position or argument unfairly so that it is easier to shoot down.
Affirming the consequent?
-Affirming the consequent is a logical fallacy that derives a conclusion A from the conditional claim ‘if A, then B’, and the affirmation that B is the case.
