Section B Philosophical Questions about Logic Flashcards
- Briefly state the dialecticality requirement for informal logic.
The dialecticality requirement for informal logic refers to the idea that arguments are not just logical structures, but also part of a larger social and communicative process. In other words, arguments are not just evaluated in terms of their logical validity, but also in terms of their effectiveness in achieving their intended goals within a given context or dialogue. This means that an argument is expected to be responsive to the criticisms and objections raised by the opposing side, and to contribute to the resolution of a disagreement or conflict.
- What is the fallacy fallacy?
The fallacy fallacy is a type of logical fallacy in which an argument is dismissed as invalid solely because it contains a logical fallacy.
- Give an explanation of the Owl of Minerva Problem for informal logic.
The owl of minerva flies only at dusk - which is a poetic way of saying wisdom is achieved only in hindsight.
the Owl of Minerva Problem suggests that it may be difficult to identify the weaknesses and strengths of an argument in the moment because the analyst may not have access to all relevant information or may not be able to fully appreciate the nuances of the context in which the argument is being presented.
- What is Michael Gilbert’s notion of coalescent argumentation?
Michael Gilbert’s notion of coalescent argumentation emphasizes finding the common ground between two opposing positions rather than winning an argument.
- Briefly state the regress problem for justification.
it is the problem of explaining what reasons or evidence one has for holding a certain belief, and why those reasons or evidence are themselves justified.
- What is a problem for foundationalism as a solution to the regress problem?
Foundationalism is a theory that proposes a solution to the regress problem by positing that certain beliefs or knowledge claims can be justified without appealing to any further beliefs.
This problem arises because foundational beliefs are typically used to justify other beliefs, but in order to use them in this way, it is necessary to assume that they are already justified.
- What is a problem for infinitism as a solution to the regress problem?
Infinitism as a solution to the regress problem holds that justification can continue infinitely without the need for any foundations. However, one problem with infinitism is that it seems to be impractical as no one has infinite time and resources to go through an infinite chain of reasons to justify a belief.
- What is a problem for circularism as a solution to the regress problem?
Circularism is a solution to the regress problem in which beliefs are justified by their coherence with other beliefs, without the need for a foundation. However, a problem with circularism is that it can lead to a lack of epistemic progress or the possibility of being stuck in a self-sealing system of beliefs.
- What is a deep disagreement?
A deep disagreement is a type of disagreement that occurs when two or more parties have fundamental differences in their basic beliefs or values that cannot be resolved through rational argumentation or evidence. In other words, they have a fundamental disagreement about the nature of reality, morality, or some other fundamental aspect of their worldview. As a result, these disagreements often persist over time and cannot be easily resolved through compromise or negotiation.
10.What are the two objectives of understanding fallacies?
To identify and criticize bad arguments
To improve argumentation
11.Explain the following sentence: The methods of logic help you resist the belief bias with reasoning.
The belief bias is the tendency to evaluate arguments based on whether their conclusions agree with our preexisting beliefs, rather than based on the soundness of the argument itself. The methods of logic, such as deduction and induction, provide a systematic and rigorous way to evaluate arguments, helping to resist the influence of the belief bias.
12.What are the benefits of being an ideal theorist about logic? What are the costs?
benefits
Firstly, ideal theorists aim to provide a complete and accurate account of the logical principles and rules that govern good reasoning. This can help people reason better by providing clear guidelines and standards for evaluating arguments. Secondly, ideal theorists can help identify and diagnose problems with reasoning, such as fallacies and biases, which can aid in correcting and improving arguments.
However, there are also costs to being an ideal theorist about logic. One cost is that ideal theories of logic can be quite abstract and removed from the actual practices of reasoning in everyday life. This can make it difficult to apply these theories to real-world problems and situations.
