Test #1, #2 Flashcards
What is an Argument and its purpose?
An Argument, is a set of statements, where one of them (the conclusion) is meant to be supported by the remaiming statements (the premises)
points and reasons provided are intended to establish and from arguments
What is a Premise?
It’s a statement (reasons and support) that is offered in support of a conclusion
ex: “why tmu is a great school - and the reasons that follow are premises”
premises are attempting to support conclusion
the reasons that are supposed to support the conclusion are the premises of the argument
What is a conclusion?
A conclusion is a statement that is held to be supported by one or more premsises
the claim the arguments are intending to make is it’s conclusion
premise: all universities are great places to learn
premise: TMU is a university
conclusion: TMU is a great place to learn
What is an assertion?
An assertion is something that is IS or IS NOT the case
simply when you have a true or false statement
Assertions are declarative sentences used to convey a
point/message of an argument.
Examples:
“Today is Friday”
“it is not raining”
“she will win the race”
What is a proposition?
The specific thought or idea that the statement expresses
Propositions are the ideas behind a statement, or the thought that said statement represents.
Propositions can be expressed
through different statements but still convey the same meaning, for example, language– “It’s
snowing” has the same meaning as “Il neige” (French)
It is possible for the same statement to express different propositions depending on who states it, and when and where etc (the context)
At the same time, the same words can express a different
proposition. For example, “There’s a bank on the left”, is it a money bank, or a fishing bank, also who’s left?
What are the 2 main points that makeup an argument?
the 2 main pieces of your argument,
these being the Premises and the Conclusion. When working with an argument we must give
the reader a logical reason to believe our proposition, this is done through Premises.
Premises are statements that are offered in support of the argument’s conclusion.
In simple
terms, this is the evidence that backs the claim we are trying to make, for example, you’re
trying to explain to your friend why Burger Legend has the best chicken sandwiches around:
“Yeah man, I love burger legend because….”. In this example, any reasoning we use
in support of our claim is the premise of our argument.
The Conclusion is what our
aforementioned premises are supporting. Using the same example, our conclusion/point
we’re trying to make would be the fact that Burger Legend is the best burger place in town.
The Conclusion is the main point, while the premise supports it.
What is an infrence?
It is the mental step of accepting the conclusion on basis of reasons/evidence
an infrence is a process of reasoning from a premise or premises to a conclusion, based on those premises
example: lawyer asking the jury to make an infrence
poor infrence is making a conclusion based on lack of evidence
What are the 3 steps of argument analysis? and explain each step
Step 0 - Figure out if it is really an argument or not
- Not all texts or passages contain arguements
a) some texts are just descriptive (eg; a newspaper story of a car acident, a description of a thing) these are NOT arguments
b) some texts just are there to offer an authors opinion, without trying to provide reasons to accept it. these are NOT arguements
- opnion by itself is not an argument
- if an opinion is not supported by reasons it is rationally worthless
c) an “if-then” statement by itself, is not an arguement
- “if it is raining, then the party will be cancelled” - this is not an arguement no supporting evidence, no premise just a statement
step 1 - reconstruct the arguement
- arguments are not always presented or written in the clearest way.
- figure out how to identify and clearly display the underlying logical structure of an argument
- process of interpreting and clarifying an arguement is reconstructing
- example: polititan making a speech, the arguement is hidden within
step 2 - evaluate the argument
- Thinking if an arguement is good or not
- this is NOT evaluating literary merit or rhetorical power
- use literary merit, rhetorical power, and rational strength to evaluate arguement
What are the 3 tools for having a strong arguement?
- Literary Merit
- Rhetorical Power
- Rational Strength
Explain Literary merit
a passage has literary merit when it is well-written. orginal, and interesting
Explain Rheotical power
an arguement has rhtorical power when it is has a tendency to convince or prsuade
Explain rational strength
An arguemnt has rational strength when the premises provide good reasons to think that the conclusion is true
This tool uses our human rationale, things like “Hitting people is bad because
of….” the conclusion that hitting people is bad usually clicks in our head, because yeah, assault is bad
What is Critical Thinking?
Critical Thinking is a system for analysis of arguments
via a rational standard”.
- it is systematic because it involves sistinct procedures and methods (no gut feelings)
- it is used to analyze existing arguments of other people and your own and to formulate new ones of your own
- It’s basically the evaluation of
arguments based on how well their premises support their conclusions.
Why should we think critcally?
- Because we really do care about the truth; about gettig things right and about gaining knowledge; about avoiding false beliefs etc
Our beliefs affect our efforts and how our lives
unfold, beliefs shape who we are and by critically thinking we can “optimise” how we’re shaped in a
way.
What is knowledge?
- knowledge by acquintance - opprtunity cost
- knowledge how
- propositional knowldege
Knowledge, This is simply the belief that something is true and supported by good reason
Knowledge is the understanding or awareness of something that is true. It involves having justified beliefs about facts or concepts. To “know” something typically means:
Belief: You believe it.
Truth: What you believe is actually true.
Justification: You have good reasons or evidence to believe it.
What is the 3 Key Ingrediants for knowledge? explain each one
- BELIEF - To think something is true (ex: believing in god)
- belief is compatible for knowledge and required
- believing = knowing something & knowing = believing something
- to truly be knowledgeable about something we must actually believe it’s true
- TRUTH - For something to be true
- if something is or is not the case in reality.
- not everything is known
- if it is known by you then it is true
- ex; (2 + 2 = 4)
- Objective truth - where it isnt based on perception it’s just true (mostly in science based topics)
- JUSTIFICIATION - Good reason to believe that the claim being stated is true
- Plato agreed that true belief was not knowledge
- truth and beliefs are not always there for good reason
- Believe stuff for GOOD reasons
- ex; go train leaving at 4:15 you believe it leaves at 4:15 but that is not a good reason for belief
What are the 4 different views on truth?
- Realism
- Nihilism
- Relativism
- Philosophical Skeptic
What is Realism?
Realists believe that there is TRUTH in some subject area (ex: math, morality, religion)
- It involves TWO claims:
i) There are truths in that subject area AND -
ii) What these truths are does NOT depend upon anyones beliefs about them in other words (objective)
In other words, something is true if it matches the way things actually are, even if no one believes it or knows it yet. For example, if a tree exists in a forest, it’s real whether or not anyone is there to see it.
What is Nihilism?
Nihilits believe that there is NO TRUTHS about anything
i) there just are no truths in any certain field, or area of topic
In short, nihilism denies that there are any absolute truths or higher purposes to life.
What is Moral Nihilism
the view that moral statements have NO truth-value, they are neither true nor false
Moral nihilism is the belief that there are no objective moral truths—no actions are inherently right or wrong. According to moral nihilism, ideas of “good” or “bad” are just human-made concepts, and there’s no universal moral standard that applies to everyone.
In short, moral nihilists think that morality is meaningless or subjective, and nothing is truly right or wrong on its own.
What is some pros and cons to realism?
The main drawback to realism is that it is implausible; does not work well in some areas (humour, beauty) relativism would be more plausible
Pros of Realism:
- Grounded in facts: Realism is based on the idea that truth exists independently of our beliefs, which encourages evidence-based thinking and objectivity.
- Reliable view of the world: It helps us understand the world as it really is, which can be useful for science and everyday life.
- Consistency: Since realism believes in an objective reality, it promotes stability and consistency in how we view and interact with the world.
Cons of Realism:
- Overlooks personal experiences: Realism focuses on external truths and may ignore how individuals experience the world differently, which can be limiting in areas like art, culture, or subjective experience.
- Rigid thinking: It can lead to a rigid view of the world, not allowing for flexibility or different interpretations of reality.
- Difficulty in moral issues: Realism struggles to account for subjective areas like morality, emotions, and personal values, where objective truths might not be clear.
We should be realists only in certain fields such as:
- Science
- History
We should not be realists in areas such as:
- Morality
- Art & Literature
- Personal Beliefs & Values
What is some pros and cons of Nihilism?
Pros:
- freedom from societal expectations
Cons:
- Self Defeating/Contradictory - deny’s and claims no truth of everything but finds truth and believes in Nihilism)
What is Relativism?
Relativists agree that there is truth in some domains
i) there are truths in the subject area but -
ii) what the truths are depends upon (relative to) what we (for someone) believes them to be
this is by far the most common way of thinking. A
prime example of this is religion, some people believe that it has truth while some don’t.
there are 2 types of relativism -
- Subjective
- “that’s true for me”
“thats my truth”
Subjective is based on an individual person’s beliefs,
for example the belief that stealing from large enough companies is okay, or lying is good in certain
circumstances (stuff like morals and ethics).
-social
“thats true for us”
“thats our truth”
Social Relativism is based on the thoughts of a
community/society (similar topics)
For example, what one culture thinks is morally right might be seen as wrong in another culture, and relativism says both perspectives can be valid.
In short, relativism means that truth and values are flexible and change depending on different viewpoints or contexts.
What is the pros and cons of relativism?
Pros:
- Makes it easier to co-exist
- Flexibilty
Cons:
- Implausible - implies that people can’t be wrong about anything
- Easy to contradict yourself
What is Philosophical Skepticism?
Not a view about truth, primarily about knowledge.
someone who thinks truth exists and they are objective
i) statements have truth-values but -
ii) we don’t know what most or all of them are
in other words, we know a lot less than we think, or nothing at all
skeptic believes in truth, and belief but skeptic does not believe in justification
unless all your beliefs can be proved that it is not a dream or simulation, skeptic says belief is not justfified
why do people hold the view of philosophical skepticism?
- Dream Hypothesis
- Evil Genius Hypothesis
Explain the dream hypothesis
The dream hypothesis is the idea that we could be dreaming at any given moment and that our current experiences might not be real. It suggests that, just like in dreams, what we perceive could be an illusion, making it hard to tell the difference between dreaming and waking life.
“how do we know i really went to class this morning? i couldve been dreaming”
Explain the Evil Genius hypotheis
The evil genius hypothesis (or evil demon hypothesis) is a thought experiment by philosopher René Descartes. It suggests that an all-powerful, deceptive being (an “evil genius” or “evil demon”) could be tricking us into believing that the world around us is real when it’s actually an illusion. This being could manipulate our thoughts and senses, making us doubt everything we think we know.
In short, the evil genius hypothesis questions whether we can trust anything, as a powerful deceiver could be controlling our perceptions and thoughts, making reality itself uncertain.
Explain the cohernce model of truth, and it’s drawback
This model of truth states that propositions are only true if it is Coherent/Consistent with
known beliefs/systems of well supported statements, hence the name Coherence Model.
For example,
you’re in Kray Klasses 500 man lecture hall and you propose that the class has more than 6 people in
via the Coherence Model you would be spreading a truthful statement due to the fact it is inline
with A: What we see and B: fits coherently with beliefs we already have.
Despite how clear and easy this theory is, its main drawback is that when it comes to developing new things/theories they won’t pass the test due to their lack of consistency with currently
existing theories, does that mean that they’re not true, of course not but the theory says so.
Another
main drawback is the idea that just because something is coherent with current views means that it’s
“true”, for example things like conspiracy theories.
What is Issac Watts 4 types of argument respondents
- Contradiction person
- Dogmatist
- Skeptic
- credulos person
Explain the Credulos Person
A credulous person is someone who is very gullible and easily believes things without questioning them or looking for evidence. They tend to accept what they are told at face value, even if it might not be true.
as long as it sounds convincing enough
explain the contradiction person
person of contradiction is someone whose beliefs, actions, or statements often conflict with each other. They may say one thing but do the opposite, or hold views that don’t logically fit together.
They argue with everything they hear, and disagree
explain the dogmatist
dogmatist is someone who holds strong, rigid beliefs and refuses to change them, even when presented with new evidence or arguments. They are very certain they are right and are not open to considering other viewpoints.
Explain the “issac watt” skeptic
The issac watt skeptic “believes nothing” and is afraid to give assent to anything”
sceptic of everything, doesn’t
believe anything out of fear of being mistaken.
Explain what an Arguement stopper is
Variety of quick responses to arguements that have the effect of cutting off discussion and preventing careful analysis
ex:
- “thats a matter of opinion”
- “Let’s agree to disagree.” (avoids resolving the issue)
Explain the One truth value theory
Propositions is true if it describes things as they actually are, this would deem it a True proposition, while the opposite would be a False propositions.
These are truth values and according to
the One Truth Value Theory, it’s basically the idea that a statement can only have one truth value, things are either True or False.
what are the drawbacks of skepticism?
- requiring absolute certainty for a belief to count as knowledge seems to be asking too much
- skepticism about everything is self-defeating.
Explain Belief
Belief is a key part of knowledge, before we can even start trying to understand if a statement is considered knowledge, we need to understand belief.
There are 3 main points when believing a
proposition
1- Believe what is being offered
2- Disbelief what is being offered
3- Suspend Judgement (neither)
At a given time, only one of these 3 options can be pickled. Belief can generally be referred to as 2 main things.
Firstly, personal thoughts and personal feelings, for example there are things we
believe in more than others, some people have stronger belief in something like politics than what they’re gonna have for lunch today. Secondly controversial things that aren’t particularly known yet/
things that can be known
Explain the rational thinker
They try their best to understand the information they recieve and form conclusions based on that information
they do 3 things.
Distinguish genuine arguments
Understand and interpret arguments
Evaluate Arguments
What are the 5 things that get in the way of argument analysis
- Inadequate Vocabulary
- Fear of tolerence & open minded roles
- Misunderstanding the point of argument analysis
- misconceptions about truth and reality
- reliance on argument stoppers
Explain what an Interrogative sentance is
To ask questions we use interrogative sentences such as:
- Whatb time is it?
- Did you feed the dog?
Explain what a imperative sentence is?
To give commands we use imperative sentences
- Tell me the time!
- Feed the dog!
Explain what a declarative sentence is
To describe things, we use declarative sentences
- Some gardeners do not use pesticides
- I fed the dog
- Nixon resigned from president in 1974
DECLARATIVE SENTENCES ARE ALMOST ALWAYS THE ONES WE USE FOR ARGUMENTS
Explain the truth and correspndence to the facts “Basic Idea”
To say something is “true” is to say something is the same as the sentence describes. For example in
(7) in the textbook, the statement “Richard Nixon resigned from the presidency in 1974” is made, this
statement would be “true’ if Nixon truly did resign in 1974. And if Nixon truly didn’t resign in 1974
then the statement would be “false”.
Explain the correspondence principle
Sentence is only true when it corresponds to the facts (of the world)
Sentence is only false when it fails to correspond to the facts
Some issues/examples lead people to reject CP
Sometimes some details of its formulation can cause misunderstandings/fail in argument analysis
Explain the mistaken objection
-Example: “The Earth is flat” (believed by people during ancient times)
- Believed this because the Earth looked flat, and experts agreed
- Even though we know it is not true (based on scientific evidence), during their times it was definitely true for them
When it comes to discussion like this, people tend to say different POVs are “true for” the various participants in the controversy
n the case of people once believing the Earth was flat:
The belief was based on what they could see and what experts of the time agreed on, making it their “truth.”
From their perspective, this made sense, and it shaped how they understood the world.
However, with scientific advancements (like discovering the Earth’s curvature through exploration and later space travel), we now know the Earth is round, so the old belief is false from an objective standpoint.
This example illustrates how “truth” can be seen differently depending on knowledge, context, or available evidence. What was “true for” ancient people was based on their limited understanding, but science corrected this mistaken principle. It shows how people’s perspectives are shaped by the knowledge and consensus of their time, even when later shown to be incorrect.
Explain improving upon the basic idea
- A declrative statement is only true provided it correctly describes the world
- To understand how to modify the correspondence principal we need to make two points:
- A distinction between sentence tokens and sentence types
- sometimes two sentence tokens of the same type are used to express the very same thought or idea
explain what a sentence token is
sentence tokens are specific utterances or inscriptions such as marks on paper or the chalkboard
in other words Sentence tokens refer to specific instances where a sentence is either spoken (an utterance) or written down (an inscription, like marks on paper or on a chalkboard). Each time you see or hear the sentence, that’s a different sentence token, even if the words are the same.
A sentence token is just a single instance of a sentence. Think of it like a copy of a sentence that is actually spoken or written down. If you say or write the same sentence multiple times, each time it’s said or written, it counts as a different “token.”
For example:
“The dog is happy.”
If you say or write this sentence five times, each one is a separate sentence token, even though the words are the same.
