Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Philo > Philosophy exam coverage > Flashcards

Philosophy exam coverage Flashcards

1
Q

Two general types of Reasoning

A

Deductive Argument
Inductive Argument

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

-can only be known directly by the
person who has the belief or makes
the statement considered to be true.

A

Private Truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

-Committed when reasoning is circular in
that the conclusion is already assumed in the
premises

A

Fallacy of Begging the Question

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

is a kind of property whose opposite
is falsity.

A

Truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

-Committed when one evaluates an
argument by means of citing something
about the person who asserts the said
argument.
-An argument is claimed to be wrong
because of some negative qualities of the
person who asserted the argument.
Example:
* She cannot be a good president. For
she comes in a broken family.

A

Fallacy of Appeal to the Person (Ad
Hominem)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

-Committed when one appeals to general,
common, popular or stereotypical prejudices
or beliefs to cause the acceptance of some
conclusion.
Example:
* We should drink this brand of beer.
For it is the regular drink of
successful men after a hard day’s
work.

A

Fallacy of Appeal to Popular Will
(Argumentum ad populum)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Proven by the premise

A

Conclusion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

-Committed when one appeals to an
authority whose field of expertise does not
include the nature of the conclusion being
established.
Example:
* We should vote for this candidate.
For he is endorsed by our favorite
basketball player.

A

Fallacy of Appeal to Inappropriate
Authority (Ad Verecundiam)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

-its truth is acknowledged by
everyone (objective truths)

A

Universal Truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

provides justification for the
conclusion.

A

Premise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

-Error in Reasoning is brought about by the
occurrence of ambiguous terms whose
meanings are confused in an argument.

A

Fallacy of Ambiguity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

-Committed when one applies a general rule
to individual cases, which, because of their
special or accidental nature, the general rule
does not properly apply.
Example:
* Running is good for the heart.
Therefore, running will be good for
Pedro who is suffering from heart
disease.

A

Fallacy of Accident

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

whatever is; whatever not is not. everything is its own being, and not being is not being.

A

Principle of Identity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Bearers of Truth

A

Statement
Beliefs
Sentences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

-Committed when one asks a question that
contains unproved assumptions.
-Committed when one argues that these
assumptions are true just because an answer
is given to the complex question.
Example:
* A lawyer who wants to establish that
person A is beating his child asks
this question: Have you stopped
beating your child?

A

Fallacy of Complex Question

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

-Error in reasoning is brought about by the
irrelevance of the premises to the
conclusion

A

Fallacy of Relevance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

-does not extend our knowledge (the
information provided by the
predicate is contained in the
information provided by the subject)

A

Analytic Truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

is not true in all possible situations
(empirical truths)
-only true in some particular
situations

A

Contingent Truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Mistakes or errors in reasoning.

A

Fallacy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

-Committed when one appeals to force,
often with subtlety, to cause the acceptance
of a conclusion.
Example:
* It is your duty to pledge allegiance to
this constitution. For otherwise
rebellion charges will be filed against
you.

A

Fallacy of Appeal to Force (Ad Baculum
or Bandwagon)

21
Q

-extends our knowledge (the information provided by the predicate is not contained in the information provided by the subject)

A

Synthetic Truth

22
Q
  • The truth of the statement arrived at
    through the process of deductive
    reasoning, is merely probable.
    (specific to general)
A

Inductive Truth

23
Q

Posteriori (after some relevant
experience)
-sense of experience (experience
through the five organs senses)

A

Empirical Truth

24
Q

-Committed when several meanings of a
word or phrase become confused in the
context of one argument.

A

Fallacy of Equivocation

25
Q

-under what area of study does the
topic or content of a belief or
statement that is held to be true falls.
-different areas of study (religious
truth, scientific truth, psychological
truth, economic truth, etc.)

A

Disciplinal Kind of Truth

26
Q

-Committed when one appeals to pity cause
the acceptance of a conclusion.
Example:
* This man certainly deserves a
promotion. For he can hardly feed
his starving family.

A

Fallacy of Appeal to Pity (Argumentum
ad misericordiam)

27
Q

the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline. means love of wisdom, which “philo” is love and “sophia” is wisdom

A

Philosophy

28
Q

The truth of the premises is supposed
to prove that the truth of the
conclusion is probable.
* Either strong or weak.
* It is true if the probability is above
50%.
* As strong inductive argument could
be cogent or uncogent.

A

Inductive Argument

29
Q

thing is either is or is not; between being and not-being, there is no middle ground possible.

A

Principle of Excluded Middle

30
Q

-When it is argued that a proposition is true
simply on the basis that it has not been
proven false, or that it is false because it has
not been proven true.
Example:
* Mental telepathy must be accepted as
a fact. For nobody has proven that it
is impossible.

A

Fallacy of Argument from Ignorance
(Argumentum ad ignorantiam)

31
Q

are errors due to
an anomaly or defect in the content
of an argument.

A

Informal Fallacy

32
Q

Error in reasoning is brought about by the
occurrence of complex or loaded
expressions whose assumptions are
questionable or have not yet proven to be
true:
* Complex Question
* False cause
* Begging the Question
* Accident
* Hasty Generalization or Converse
Accident

A

Fallacy of Presumption

33
Q

-dependent on the attitudes,
preferences, or interests of a person
or a group of persons.
-value judgement (aesthetic
judgements)

A

Subjective Truth

34
Q

-Committed when one applies a general rule
to individual cases, which, because of their
special or accidental nature, the general rule
does not properly apply.
Example:
* Running is good for the heart.
Therefore, running will be good for
Pedro who is suffering from heart
disease.

A

Fallacy of Accident

35
Q

are errors in
reasoning due to an incorrect form or
structure of an argument.

A

Formal Fallacy

36
Q

-Committed when one attributes a wrong
cause to something, which is often due to a
mere temporal succession of two events.
Example:
* Edgar Allan Poe’s literary genius
must have been caused by drinking
liquor.

A

Fallacy of False Cause (Post Hoc)

37
Q

Nothing exist without sufficient reason for its being and existence

A

Principle of Sufficient Reason

38
Q

-The reverse of composition.
-Committed when one reasons from the
qualities of a whole to the qualities of the
parts of the whole.

A

Fallacy of Division

39
Q

-The truth of the statement arrived at
through the process of deductive
reasoning, is certain. (general to
specific)

A

Deductive Truth

40
Q

Committed when one reasons from the
qualities of the parts of a whole to the
qualities of the whole itself.

A

Fallacy of Composition

41
Q

-Justify or prove the truth of a statement or belief on the basis of the truth of another statement or belief.
-End result is an argument.

A

Reasoning or Inference

42
Q

Prioi (before some relevant
experience)
-reason (through inference or
analysis of concepts)

A

Rational Truth

43
Q

-can be known, in principle, be
known directly by everyone (by “in
principle” we mean the occurrence or
presence of the necessary conditions
like knowing person is a normal
adult.

A

Public Truth

44
Q

-its truth acknowledged only by
some people (subjective truths)

A

Relative Truth

45
Q

It is impossible for a thing to be and not to be at the same time.

A

Principle of Non Contradiction

46
Q
  • The truth of the premise is supposed
    to prove the truth of the conclusion is
    certain.
  • Either valid or invalid
  • Solely determined by the structure.
  • If it is valid it could be sound or
    unsound
  • The methods for determining the
    validity or invalidity of various
    argument forms are studied in the
    branch of Philosophy called Logic
A

Deductive Argument

47
Q

-is true in all possible situations
(rational truths)

A

Necessary Truth

48
Q

-independent of the attitudes,
preferences, or interest of a person or
a groul of persons.
-factual judgements

A

Objective Truth

Philo (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions