Scribd
Upload
50 views42 pages

Legal Tech and Logic

Uploaded by

Patatas Sayote
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
50 views42 pages

Legal Tech and Logic

Uploaded by

Patatas Sayote
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 42

REVIE

W
Logic
is the study of the methods and
principles used to distinguish
correct from incorrect reasoning.

Chief concern: Arguments


Arguments
refers strictly to any group of
propositions of which one is
claimed to follow from the others,
which are regarded as providing
support for the truth of that one.
For every possible inference there
is a corresponding argument.
Propositions
• asserts that something is the case or it
asserts that something is not

• Commonly declarative

• Test: Is it true or false?


Propositions
• Simple
• Compound
– Compound Conjunctive
• The Amazon Basin produces roughly 20 percent of the Earth’s
oxygen, creates much of its own rainfall, and harbors many
unknown species.
– Compound Disjunctive
• Circuit courts are useful, or they are not useful.
– Hypothetical (or conditional)
If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
Arguments
Our concern:
1) Form of an argument
under consideration
2) Quality
One sentence Argument

Every law is an evil, for every


law is an infraction of liberty
Warning
Some propositions sound like arguments

Proposition
• If a state aims to be a society composed of equals, then a
state that is based on the middle class is bound to be the
best constituted.

Argument
• A state aims at being a society composed of equals, and
therefore a state that is based on the middle class is bound
to be the best constituted.
• A. Conclusion Indicators
and Premise Indicators
• B. Arguments in Context
• C. Premises or Conclusions
Not in Declarative Form
• D. Unstated Propositions
Recognizing Arguments
• A. Conclusion Indicators and Premise Indicators
Premise Indicators

Conclusion Indicators
Recognizing Arguments
• B. Arguments in Context

The full force of argument and


counterargument can be grasped,
in most circumstances, only with
an understanding of the context
in which those arguments are
presented. In real life, context is
critical.
Recognizing Arguments
• B. Arguments in Context

Eg. As we send our young men and


women abroad to bring order to Iraq,
many of its so called leaders have
abandoned their posts. We have given
the Iraqis an opportunity to iron out
their differences and they throw it back
in our faces. Iraq does not deserve our
help.
Recognizing Arguments
• B. Arguments in Context

Eg. Half the American population


believes that the universe is 6,000
years old. They are wrong about
this. Declaring them so is not
“irreligious intolerance.” It is
intellectual honesty
Recognizing Arguments

• C. Premises or Conclusions Not in Declarative Form

Rhetorical questions
Interrogative in form but declarative meaning

Eg. I am irked by the new set of coins being issued.


While some first ladies have influenced our country,
should we bestow this honor on people who are
unelected, whose only credential is having a
prominent spouse?
Recognizing Arguments

• C. Premises or Conclusions Not in


Declarative Form

Covert Assertion

Avoids responsibility in
asserting
Recognizing Arguments

• C. Premises or Conclusions Not in


Declarative Form

Eg. If a right to euthanasia is


grounded in self-determination,
it cannot reasonably be limited
to the terminally ill. If people
have a right to die, why must
they wait until they are actually
dying before they are permitted
to exercise that right?
Recognizing Arguments

• D. Unstated Propositions

Arguments are sometimes obscure


because one (or more) of their
constituent propositions is not stated but
is assumed to be understood.

Enthymeme
An argument that is stated incompletely,
the unstated part of it being taken for
granted.
Recognizing Arguments

• D. Unstated Propositions
Human cloning—like abortion,
contraception, pornography and
euthanasia—is intrinsically evil and
thus should never be allowed.

Unstated Proposition:
What is intrinsically evil should never
be allowed.
Recognizing Arguments
• D. Unstated Propositions
If the proponent of the death penalty is incorrect in his belief that
the [death] penalty deters homicide, then he is responsible for the
execution of murderers who should not be executed.

Unstated Proposition:
No one should be executed to advance an objective that is not
promoted by execution

Hence one who mistakenly believes that the objective (deterring


murders) is achieved by executing those convicted is responsible
for the execution of murderers who should not be executed
Recognizing Arguments
• D. Unstated Propositions
If the opponent of the death penalty is incorrect in his belief that the
death penalty doesn’t deter, he is responsible for the murder of
innocent individuals who would not have been murdered if the
death penalty had been invoked.

Unstated Proposition:
Protecting the lives of innocent individuals from murder justifies the
execution of murderers if other murderers are then deterred by the
fear of execution.

Hence one who mistakenly believes that the death penalty does not
deter murderers is responsible for the lives of innocents who are
subsequently murdered.
• An argument is a rationale in which
the reason presents evidence in
support of a claim made in the
conclusion. Its purpose is to
provide a basis for believing the
conclusion to be true.

• An explanation is a rationale in
which the reason presents a cause
of some fact represented by the
conclusion. Its purpose is to help
us understand how or why that fact
occurs.
Arguments and Explanations
• An argument answers the question: How do
you know? This is a request for evidence.

• An explanation answers the question: Why


is that so? This is a request for a cause.
Arguments and Explanations
Eg. The most distant quasars look like intense
points of infrared radiation. This is because space is
scattered with hydrogen atoms (about two per cubic
meter) that absorb blue light, and if you filter the
blue from visible white light, red is what’s left. On its
multibillion-light-year journey to earth quasar light
loses so much blue that only infrared remains.

• explaining, not arguing


Arguments and Explanations
• Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven,
where neither moth nor rust consumes and where
thieves do not break in and steal. For where your
treasure is, there will your heart be also.

• Conclusion, that one ought to lay up treasures in


heaven, is supported by the premise (here marked
by the word“for”) that one’s heart will be where
one’s treasure is laid up.
Arguments and Explanations
• Therefore is the name of it [the tower]
called Babel; because the Lord did there
confound the language of all the earth.

• It explains why the tower (whose construction is


recounted in Genesis) is called Babel.
• A deductive argument makes
the claim that its conclusion is
supported by its premises
conclusively.

• An inductive argument, in
contrast, does not make such a
claim. Depends on probability.
Deductive and Inductive Argument
• A deductive argument is one whose conclusion is
claimed to follow from its premises with absolute
necessity, this necessity not being a matter of
degree and not depending in any way on whatever
else may be the case.

• In sharp contrast, an inductive argument is one whose


conclusion is claimed to follow from its premises
only with probability, this probability being a matter
of degree and dependent on what else may be the case
Deductive Arguments
• If all humans are mortal and Socrates is human, we
may conclude without reservation that Socrates is
mortal.

• that conclusion will follow from those premises no


matter what else may be true in the world, and no
matter what other information may be discovered or
added.
Inductive Arguments
Most corporation lawyers are conservatives.
Miriam Graf is a corporation lawyer.
Therefore Miriam Graf is probably a conservative.

Added info:
Miriam Graf is an officer of the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU).
Most officers of the ACLU are not conservatives.
Warning

the mere presence of the word “probability” in an


argument gives no assurance that the
argument is inductive.

Eg. If the probability of three successive heads in


three tosses of a coin is 1/8, one may infer
deductively that the probability of getting at
least one tail in three tosses of a coin is 7/8.
• Validity – Arguments
• Truth - Propositions
• I. Some valid arguments contain only true
propositions—true premises and a true
conclusion:
• All mammals have lungs.
• All whales are mammals.
• Therefore all whales have lungs.
• II. Some valid arguments contain only false
propositions—false premises and a false
conclusion:
• All four-legged creatures have wings.
• All spiders have exactly four legs.
• Therefore all spiders have wings.
• 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 is illustrated by an argument
exactly like the previous one (III) in form, changed only
enough to make the conclusion false.
• If Bill Gates owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then Bill Gates
would be wealthy.
• Bill Gates does not own all the gold in Fort Knox.
• Therefore Bill Gates is not wealthy
• V. Some valid arguments have false premises
and a true conclusion:
• All fishes are mammals.
• All whales are fishes.
• Therefore all whales are mammals.
• 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.
• 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
Note
• the truth or falsity of an
argument’s conclusion does
not by itself determine the
validity or invalidity of that
argument
Summary

You might also like