Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Logic Notes - Topic 2

    Uploaded by

    Cornelius Jacobus CJ Corne Visser
    Notes from Copi's Introduction to Logic

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Logic Notes - Topic 2

    Uploaded by

    Cornelius Jacobus CJ Corne Visser
    6 views2 pages
    Notes from Copi's Introduction to Logic

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Notes from Copi's Introduction to Logic

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    6 views2 pages

    Logic Notes - Topic 2

    Uploaded by

    Cornelius Jacobus CJ Corne Visser
    Notes from Copi's Introduction to Logic

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    1

    TOPIC 2
    Analysis and Evaluation of Arguments

    Truth and Validity


    - NB!: Truth and Validity are independent variables. Validity is a characteristic of an argument,
    and only of deductive arguments (see below), and depends on the relations between
    propositions. Truth is a characteristic of a proposition, and depends on the reality the
    proposition attempts to represent.
    - Test for validity: Given the truth of the premises, is the conclusion necessarily true?
    - Validity + Truth = Soundness

    Deductive and Inductive Reasoning


    - Deductive reasoning: In a valid, deductive argument, given the truth of the premises, the
    conclusion cannot be false, but follows conclusively. Typically, deductive arguments move
    from the general to the specific.
    - Inductive reasoning: There is another form of reasoning, where the truth of the premises is
    only partial support of the conclusion. Based on the truth of the premises the probability, of
    the conclusion (the degree to which it is rational to rely on it) is raised. Typically, inductive
    reasoning moves from the specific to the general.

    The Evaluation of Arguments


    - 1. Establish exactly what the argument entails (identify propositions, and then premises and
    conclusion).
    - 2. Establish whether the propositions are true.
    - 3. Test for validity.
    - Based on the above-mentioned, arguments can be classified as valid/invalid, or sound/unsound

    I. Some valid arguments contain only true propositions - true premises and a true conclusion
    (this is a sound argument):

     All mammals have lungs.


     All whales are mammals.
     Therefore all whales have lungs.

    II. Some valid arguments contain only false propositions:

     All four-legged creatures have wings.


     All spiders have four legs.
     Therefore all spiders have wings.
    2

    III. Some invalid arguments contain only true propositions - all their premises are true, and their
    conclusions are true as well:

    If I owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then I would be wealthy.


     I do not own all the gold in Fort Knox.
     Therefore I am not wealthy.

    IV. Some invalid arguments contain only true premises and have a false conclusion. This can be
    illustrated with an argument exactly like the previous one (III) in form, changed only enough
    to make the conclusion false:

     If Rockefeller owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then Rockefeller would be wealthy.
     Rockefeller does not own all the gold in fort Knox.
     Therefore Rockefeller is not wealthy.

     The premises of this argument are true, but its conclusion is false - and such an argument
    cannot be valid, because it is impossible for the premises of a valid argument to be true and
    for its conclusion to be false.

    V. Some valid arguments have false premises and a true conclusion:

     All fish are mammals.


     All whales are fish.
     Therefore all whales are mammals.

     The conclusion of this argument is true, as we know; moreover it may be validly inferred from
    the two premises, both of which are wildly false.

    VI. Some invalid arguments also have false premises and a true conclusion:

    All mammals have wings.


     All whales have wings.
     Therefore all whales are mammals.

     It emerges clearly from examples V and VI taken together that we cannot tell, from the fact
    that an argument has false premises and a true conclusion, whether it is valid or invalid.

    VII. Some invalid arguments, of course, contain all false propositions - false premises and a false
    conclusion:

     All mammals have wings.


     All whales have wings.
     Therefore all mammals are whales. (Copi 2019:28-29)

    You might also like