Logic and Fallacies

Question 1

-Tool we can use to different correct and incorrect
-Organized body of knowledge, or science that evaluates arguments
-To develop a system of methods and principles that we may use as criteria for evaluating the
arguments

Answer 1

Logic

Question 2

• Represent concepts, ideas, characteristics or attributes, and relationships
• Also refer to places, things, events, or even persons.
• It is the smallest unit of meaning.

Answer 2

Words

Question 3

-Ideas formed through abstraction (the process of creating general ideas from particulars/specifics)

Answer 3

Concepts

Question 4

Are the building blocks of our knowledge. They may be

precise, vague, or ambiguous.

Answer 4

Words and concepts

Question 5

• Creates confusing meaning because of projecting limitless possibilities.
• It has unclear and indefinite scope (ex. many/few, soon, big/small, near/far); too broad

Answer 5

Vagueness

Question 6

• Is characterized by two or more meanings present in one usage
• Eg. the foreigners are hunting dogs (are they dogs? are they hunting?)

Answer 6

Ambiguity

Question 7

• Offer thoughts or ideas that “come to us one after another”
• Mere enumeration of facts or ideas

Answer 7

Thinking

Question 8

-Conscious “linking together of thoughts or ideas to make up inferences”

Answer 8

Reasoning

Question 9

• A sentence that is either true or false

- Usually a declarative sentence

Answer 9

Statement

Question 10

• The meaning or information, content of a statement
• Any statement which has a truth value
• Statements and _____ are represented by uppercase letters

Answer 10

Proposition

Question 11

A group of statements, one or more of which (the premises) are claimed to provide support for, or reasons to believe, one of the others (the conclusion)

Answer 11

Arguments

Question 12

-Statement/s that set forth the reasons or evidence
-Indicators: since, in that, seeing that, in as much as, given that
owing to, for, as, for the reason that, because, may be inferred from, as indicated by
-Support

Answer 12

Premise

Question 13

• Statement that the evidence is claimed to support or imply the statement that is claimed to follow from the premises
• Indicators: therefore, accordingly, entails that, wherefore, we may conclude, for this reason, we may infer, as a result, ergo, so, implies that, consequently, it follows that, it must be that, thus, hence

Answer 13

Conclusion

Question 14

• Reasoning process in the argument
• Not in argument form
• Can link together ideas

Answer 14

Inferences

Question 15

-Mistakes in form/structure in arguments

Answer 15

Formal Fallacy

Question 16

-Mistakes in reasoning which could only be found when the content of the argument is examined

Answer 16

Informal fallacy

Question 17

-Premise are irrelevant

Answer 17

Fallacies of Relevance

Question 18

• The thrust is directed, not at a conclusion, but at the person who asserts or defends it
• Insulting others as an argument

Answer 18

Argumentum ad Hominem (Attacking the Person)

Question 19

• Replaces the laborious task of presenting evidence and rational argument with expressive language and other device calculated to excite enthusiasm, anger or hate
• Trying to be pitied

Answer 19

Argumentum ad Misericordiam (Appeal to Pity)

Question 20

• Causes the acceptance of some conclusion by way of an appeal to coercion or force
• “Do this or else”

Answer 20

Argumentum ad Baculum (Appeal to Force)

Question 21

-“Sophism”

Confusing meanings of words and phrases in arguments

Answer 21

Fallacies of Ambiguity

Question 22

-This is committed “when we confuse the several meanings of a word or phrase –accidentally or deliberately – we are using the word equivocally in the different
parts of the argument”
-2 or more meanings of a word used in 1 argument
-Eg. light = no weight and light = not dark

Answer 22

Equivocation

Question 23

• Occurs “when its meaning is indeterminate because of the loose or awkward way in which its words are combined”
• A lot of possibilities because of how the sentence was structured
• Eg. John told Henry that he was wrong (who has wrong? John or Henry?)

Answer 23

Amphiboly

Question 24

-Not strong support for conclusion

Answer 24

Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence

Question 25

• A proposition is held to be true just because it has not been proven false, or false because it has not been proven true
• Not caring to find out if argument is true or false

Answer 25

Argumentum ad Ignorantiam (Appeal to Ignorance)

Question 26

-Occurs when cited authority or witness lacks credibility

Answer 26

Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)

Question 27

• Occurs whenever the link between premises and conclusion depends on some imagined causal connection that probably does not exist.
• Support does not make sense
• Eg. superstition

Answer 27

False Cause

Question 28

-Assuming too much

Answer 28

Fallacies of Presumption

Question 29

• A fallacy in which a generalization is mistakenly applied to a particular case to which the generalization does not apply
• General to Specific

Answer 29

Accident

Question 30

• An argument that draws conclusion about all members of a group from evidence that pertains to a selected sample
• Specific to General

Answer 30

Converse Accident (Hasty Generalization)

Question 31

• The fallacy consists of “asking a question in such a way as to presuppose the truth of some conclusion buried in that question
• A trap question and if you answer it you will be caught

Answer 31

Complex Question

Question 32

• To beg the question is to assume the truth of what one seeks to prove, in the effort to prove it.
• Arguing in a circle, using conclusion as evidence
• Eg. I’m pretty because I’m beautiful

Answer 32

Petitio Principii (Begging the Question)

Question 33

• Eliminates the undesirable alternative, leaving the desirable one as the conclusion.
• Eg. eat this or it will go to waste

Answer 33

False Dichotomy