Basic Concepts of Logic

Logic and Critical Thinking

Chapter Two
Binnyam A.
 Arguments, Premises and Conclusions
• Logic is generally be defined as a philosophical science that
evaluates arguments
• An argument is a systematic combination of one or more than one
statements, which are claimed to provide a logical support or
evidence (i.e., premise(s)) to another single statement which is
claimed to follow logically from the alleged evidence (i.e.,
conclusion).
• An argument can be either good or bad argument, depending on
the logical ability of its premise(s) to support its conclusion
• The primary aim of logic is to develop a system of methods and
principles that we may use as criteria for evaluating the
arguments of others and as guides in constructing arguments of our
own.
• The
word logic comes from Greek word logos, which
means sentence, discourse, reason, truth and rule.
• Logicin its broader meaning is the science which
evaluates arguments and the study of correct
reasoning.
• It could be also defined as the study of methods and
principles of correct reasoning or the art of correct
reasoning.
• In logic, as an academic discipline, we study reasoning
itself: forms of argument, general principles and
particular errors, along with methods of arguing
 Benefits of Studying Logic
• It helps us to develop the skill needed to construct sound (good) and fallacy-
free arguments of one’s own and to evaluate the arguments of others;
• Itprovides a fundamental defense against the prejudiced and uncivilized
attitudes that threaten the foundation of a civilized and democratic society;
• It helps us to distinguish good arguments from bad arguments;
• It helps us to understand and identify the common logical errors in reasoning;
• It helps us to understand and identify the common confusions that often
happen due to misuse of language;
• It enables us to disclose ill-conceived policies in the political sphere, to be
careful of disguises, and to distinguish the rational from irrational and the sane
from the insane and so on.
• to produce individuals who are critical, rational and reasonable both in the
sphere of public and private life
 What is an Argument?
• An arguments from logical point of view is a group of statements,
one or more of which (the premise) are claimed to provide support
for, or reason to believe, one of the other, the (conclusion).
• A statement is a declarative sentence that has a truth-value of
either true or false
• The statements that make up an argument are divided into
premise(s) and conclusion
• An argument is a group statement, which contains at least one
premise and one and only one conclusion
• There are sentences that are not statements, and hence should be
used to construct an argument. Sentences are neither true nor
false.
• Premise is a statement that set forth the reason or evidence,
which is given for accepting the conclusion of an argument.
• Conclusion is a statement, which is claimed to follow from the
given evidence (premise).
• The conclusion is the claim that an argument is trying to
establish.
• All arguments may be placed in one of two basic groups:
those in which the premises really do support the
conclusion(good OR well-supported arguments) and those
in which they do not, even though they are claimed to(bad
OR poorly-supported arguments)
 Identification of premises from conclusion

• Looking at an indicator word.

• Conclusion indicators( Therefore, Wherefore,
Accordingly, Provided that, It must be that, We
may conclude, Entails that, Hence, It shows that,
Whence, Thus, Consequently, We may infer, It
implies that, As a result , So, It follows that)
• Premise Indictors( Since, As indicated by ,
Because , Owing to, Seeing that , Given that , As ,
For , In that, May be inferred from, Inasmuch as ,
For the reason that, for this reason)
• Sometimes when an argument contains no
indicator at all, neither a conclusion indicator
word nor a premise indicator word, one must
ask such questions as to what single statement
is claimed (implicitly) to follow from the others,
what is the arguer trying to prove and what is
the main point in the passage.
• The answers to these questions should point to
the conclusion.
• Passages that contain arguments sometimes
contain statements that are neither premises nor
conclusion
• If a statement has nothing to do with the
conclusion or, for example, simply makes a
passing comment, it should not be included
within the context of the argument
• Only statements that are actually intended to
support the conclusion should be included in the
list of premises
 Techniques of Recognizing
Arguments
• Evaluating arguments about different issues in human life
is the central concern of logic.
• Two conditions must be fulfilled for a passage to purport
to prove something;
1. At least one of the statements must claim to present
evidence or reasons(Factual Claim) and
2. There must be a claim that the alleged evidence or
reasons supports or implies something- that is, a claim
that something follows from the alleged
evidence( Inferential claim)
• The inferential claim is simply the claim that
the passage expresses a certain kind of
reasoning process- that something supports
or implies something or that something
follows from something
• The inferential claim is an objective feature of
an argument grounded in its language or
structure devoid of arguers intention.
• An inferential claim can be either explicit or
implicit
• An explicit inferential claim is usually asserted
by premise or conclusion indicator words like
thus, since, because, hence, therefore and so on.
• It exists if there is an indicator word that asserts
an explicit relationship between the premises and
the conclusions.
• An implicit inferential claim exists if there is an
inferential relationship between the statements
in a passage, but the passage contains no
indicator words.
• In deciding whether there is a claim that evidence
supports or implies something, look for indicator
words, and the presence of an inferential claim
between the statements.
• The presence of an indicator word does not mean
that the existing indicator word actually and always
indicate a premises or a conclusions unless the
existing indicator word is used to indicate a premise
or a conclusion.
• It is not always easy to detect the occurrences of an inferential
relationship between statements in a passage, and the reader
may have to review a passage several times before making a
decision( non argumentative passage)
• Non-argumentative passages are passages, which lack an
inferential claim.
• Passages that lack an inferential claim may be statements,
which could be premises, conclusion, or both missing a claim
that a reasoning process is being made
• simple non-inferential passages, expository passages,
illustrations, explanations, and conditional statements are
categories of non argumentative passages.
• Simple non-inferential passages are unproblematic
passages that lack a claim that anything is being
proved. e.g. warnings, pieces of advice, statements of
belief or opinion, loosely associated statements, and
reports)
• An expository passage is a kind of discourse that
begins with a topic sentence followed by one or more
sentences that develop the topic sentence. If the
objective is not to prove the topic sentence but only
to expand it or elaborate it, then there is no argument
• An illustration is an expression involving one
or more examples that is intended to show
what something means or how it is done.
• In deciding whether an illustration should be
interpreted as an argument, determine
whether the passage merely shows how
something is done or what something means,
or whether it also purports to prove something.
• An explanation is an expression that purports
to shed light on some event or phenomenon,
which is usually accepted as a matter of fact.
• Every explanation is composed of two distinct
components: the explanandum and
explanans. The explanandum is the
statement that describes the event or
phenomenon to be explained, and the
explanans is the statement or group of
statements that purports to do the explaining
• A conditional statement is an “if . . . then . . .”
statement.
• Every conditional statement is made up of
two component statements. The component
statement immediately following the “if” is
called the antecedent (if-clause), and the one
following the “then” is called the consequent
(then-clause).
• When occasionally the word ‘‘then’’ is left out,
the order of antecedent and consequent is
reversed
• The relation between conditional statements and
arguments may now be summarized as follows
1. A single conditional statement is not an argument.
2. A conditional statement may serve as either the
premise or the conclusion (or both) of an argument.
3. The inferential content of a conditional statement
may be re-expressed to form an argument
• Conditional statements are especially important in logic (and
many other fields) because they express the relationship
between necessary and sufficient conditions
•A is said to be a sufficient condition for B whenever the
occurrence of A is all that is needed for the occurrence of B.
• B is said to be a necessary condition for A whenever A cannot
occur without the occurrence of B
• A is a sufficient condition for B; if A occurs, then B must
occur.
• A is a necessary condition for B; if B occur, then A must
occur.
• In deciding whether a passage contains
an argument, We should look for three
things:
• indicator words such as “therefore,”
“since,” “because,” and so on;
• an inferential relationship between the
statements; and
• Typical kinds of non-arguments.
Types of Arguments: Deduction and Induction
• A deductive argument is an argument incorporating the
claim that it is impossible for the conclusion to be false
given that the premises are true.
• It is an argument in which the premises are claimed to
support the conclusion in such a way that it is impossible
for the premises to be true and the conclusion false
• The conclusion is claimed to follow necessarily
(conclusively) from the premises involve necessary
reasoning.
• An inductive argument is an argument incorporating the
claim that it is improbable for the conclusion to be false
given that the premises are true
• It is an argument in which the premises are claimed to
support the conclusion in such a way that it is improbable
for the premises to be true and the conclusion false
• The conclusion is claimed to follow only probably from
the premises involving probabilistic reasoning.
• The premises may provide some considerable evidence
for the conclusion but they do not imply (necessarily
support) the conclusion
 Differentiating deductive from inductive
argument

• Three factors that influence the decision about the

deductiveness or inductiveness of an argument’s
inferential claim
• The occurrence of special indicator words,
• The actual strength of the inferential link between
premises and conclusion, and
• The character or form of argumentation the arguers
use.
• Deductive-certainly ,
necessarily, absolutely, and
definitely.
• Inductive-
probable,improbable,plausible,
implausible, likely, unlikely, and
reasonable to conclude.
• If the conclusion actually does follow
with strict necessity from the
premises, the argument is clearly
deductive
• If on the other hand, the conclusion of
an argument does not follow with
strict necessity but does follow
probably, it is usually best to interpret
it as inductive argument.
 Instances of Deductive
Argumentative Forms

• Argument based on mathematics-an argument in which the

conclusions depend on some purely arithmetic or geometric
computation or measurement
• Arguments based on definition-is an argument in which the
conclusion is claimed to depend merely up on the definition of
some words or phrase used in the premise or conclusion.
• Syllogisms -arguments consisting of exactly two premises
and one conclusion
• Categoricalsyllogism: A syllogism in which the
statement begins with one of the words “all”, “no”
and “some’’
• Hypotheticalsyllogism: It is a syllogism having a
conditional statement for one or both of its
premises.
• Disjunctivesyllogism: it is a syllogism having a
disjunctive statement. (I.e. an “either … or”
statement.)
 Instances of Inductive Argumentative Forms

• Prediction- the premises deals with some known event in the present or
the past and the conclusions moves beyond this event to some event to
relative future
• An argument from analogy-an argument that depends on the existence of
an analogy or similarity between two things or state of affairs
• An inductive generalization-an argument that proceeds from the
knowledge of a selected sample to some claim about the whole group
• An argument from authority- an argument in which the conclusions rest
upon a statement made by some presumed authority or witness
• Arguments based on sign-it is an argument that proceeds from the
knowledge of a certain sign to the knowledge of a thing or situation that
the sign symbolizes
• A causal inference-it is an argument which proceed from the knowledge of
a cause to the knowledge of an effect, or conversely, from the knowledge
of an effect to knowledge of a cause
 Evaluating Deductive Arguments:
Validity, Truth, and Soundness

• A valid deductive argument is an argument

such that if the premises are assumed true, it is
impossible for the conclusion to be false.
• An invalid deductive argument is an argument
such that if the premises are assumed true, it is
possible for the conclusion to be false.
• There is no middle ground between valid and
invalid. An argument is either valid or invalid
• There is only an indirect relation between validity
and truth.
• For an argument to be valid it is not necessary that
either the premises or the conclusions be true, but
merely that if the premises assumed true, it is
impossible for the conclusion be false.
• The basic idea of evaluating deductive argument,
validity (valid and invalid) is not something that is
determined by the actual truth or falsity of the
premises and conclusion.
• Rather, validity is something that is determined by
the relationship between premises and conclusion
 four possibilities

• 1. True premises and True conclusion(V A/I A)

• 2. True premises and False conclusion(IA)
• 3. False premises and True conclusion ( VA/IA)
• 4. False premises and False conclusion(VA/IA)
• All of the above possibilities, except the second case (true
premises and false conclusion), allow for both valid and invalid
arguments.
 Validity and Truth Value

• Possibility # 1: A combination of True premises and

True conclusion allows for both valid and invalid
arguments
• Possibility # 2A combination of True premises and
false conclusion allows only for invalid arguments
• Possibility # 3: A combination of False premises and
True conclusion allows for both valid and invalid
arguments
• Possibility # 4: A combination of False premises and
False conclusion allows for both valid and invalid
arguments.
• Depending on their actual ability, (assuming that
they already have actually accomplished their
inferential claims by being valid), to accomplish their
factual claims, deductive arguments can be either
sound or unsound.
• A sound argument is a deductive argument that is
valid and has all true premises. if either is missing the
argument is unsound.
• An unsound argument is a deductive argument that
is either valid with one or more false premises, or
invalid, or both.
 Evaluating Inductive Arguments: Strength, Truth,
and Cogency

• A strong inductive argument is an argument such

that if the premises are assumed true, it is
improbable for the conclusion to be false. the
conclusion follows probably from the premises.
• A weak inductive argument is an argument such
that if the premises are assumed true, it is probable
for the conclusions to be false. the conclusion does
not follow probably from the premises, even though
it is claimed to
• To be considered strong, an inductive
argument must have a conclusion that is
more probable than improbable
• The strength or weakness of an inductive
argument results not from the actual truth or
falsity of the premises and conclusion, but
from the probabilistic support the premises
give to the conclusion.
 Strength of an inductive argument and the
truth and falsity of its premises & conclusion

Premises Conclusion Strength

True True Strong/Weak
True False Weak
False True Strong/Weak
False False Strong/Weak
• Depending on their actual ability, (assuming that
they already have actually accomplished their
inferential claims by being strong), to accomplish
their factual claims, inductive arguments can be
either cogent or uncogent.
• A cogent argument is an inductive argument that is
strong and has all true premises.
• An uncogent argument is an inductive argument
that is either strong with one or more false premises,
or weak, or both
Thank You