Logic: as tool of Philosophy
description
Transcript of Logic: as tool of Philosophy
![Page 1: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Science of correct reasoning1. Nature of man: correct
thinking2. To examine our ability
to adapt: in difficult or
controversial cases.3. Organizing
ideas/arguments: expressing them with
more accuracy drawing legitimate
conclusions.
Logic: as tool of Philosophy
![Page 2: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
FORMAL LOGIC1. CORRECTNESS RATHER
THAN THE TRUTH Has to do with correctness or
sequence or the following of rules.
2. Not on the material content of the argument.
3. To reason correctly is not necessarily the same as to reason truthfully.
FORMAL & MATERIAL LOGIC
![Page 3: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
E.g. Formal Logic:
Practice makes perfect
Nobody is perfect
Why practice?
![Page 4: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Pag sumama ka sa matalino, tatalino ka rin!
Pag sumama ka sa adik, magiging adik ka rin!
Try mo sumama sa AKIN…
Baka maging AKIN ka rin!
![Page 5: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
MATERIAL LOGIC1. Concerned with
the truth2. thought-contents
is in correspondence with reality
Connection: mind & real order
![Page 6: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
E.g. Material Logic
The human soul is endowed with intellect and will;
But, what is endowed with intellect and will is spiritual;
Ergo, the human soul is spiritual.
![Page 7: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Potential recruits of Mass Media Industry are students who completed their course in Communication.
I’ve successfully completed my course in Communication last March of 2010.
I am therefore qualified to be a recruit of the Mass Media Industry.
![Page 8: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Nature of an argumentArgument is an inferential thinking that is composed of conclusion and premise (assertion/statement) from which the conclusion is inferred.
Inferential: the process of reasoning from a premise to a conclusion; in which the conclusion is drawn from evidential reasoning.
Arguments
![Page 9: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
E.g. Premise 1: anything that moves is moved by another;
Premise 2: but, the ball moves
Conclusion: therefore, the ball is moved by another.
![Page 10: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
INFERENTIAL?
PREMISES
CONCLUSION
CLAIMED EVIDENCE
WHAT IS CLAIMED TO FOLLOW FROM THE
EVIDENCE
![Page 11: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Valid: (T-T) INFERENTIAL1.The conclusion is true
because of the true premises.
2.It is impossible that the premises of an argument are true and the conclusion false
VALID & INVALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 12: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
E.g.1. All chickboys have
multiple partners/girlfriends.
2. Ysmael & Iggy Boy have 10 girlfriends each at the same time.
__________________________3. Therefore, Ysmael & Iggy
Boy are both chickboys.
VALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 13: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
1. All people who are born in the United States are U.S. citizens.
2. Tutoy was born in the United States.
____________________3. Therefore, Tutoy is a U.S. citizen.
VALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 14: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
1. All mammals have kidneys.
2. Plants do not have kidneys.
____________________3. Therefore, plants are not mammals.
VALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 15: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
T-FThe premises are true and
the conclusion is false.fallacy of affirming the
consequent.“Inductive: assuming”
“not necessarily… probably!”
(+) If it rains, then the ground gets wet.
(+) But, the ground is wet; (-) Therefore, it rained.
INVALID ARGUMENTS (PRESUMPTUOUS)
![Page 16: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
1. If Arn-Arn is in Hollywood, then he is in California.
2. Arn-Arn is in California.
______________________3. Therefore, Arn-Arn is in Hollywood.
INVALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 17: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
1. Horses are not reptiles.
2. Mr. Diego is not a reptile.
_________________3. Therefore, Mr. Diego is a horse.
INVALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 18: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
“masarap magmahal,
nagmamahal ako, samakatuwid…
masarap ako!”
God is love, but love is blind. Therefore, God is blind!”
![Page 19: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
F-FThe premises are false (NOT
MATERIAL) and it follows that the conclusion is false(NOT MATERIAL!)
It is valid because: the way in which the premises and conclusion are structured is “FORMALLY CORRECT!”
ALL TREES ARE WOMENBUT, ALL MEN ARE TREESTHEREFORE, ALL WOMEN
ARE MEN
VALID YET ABSURD
![Page 20: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
One premise: false/trueConclusion: true
(accidental)E.g.
(+) All dogs are animal;
(-) But, all cats are dogs;
(+) Therefore, all cats are animals.
VALID: UNSOUND
![Page 21: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
VALID ARGUMENTS
PREMISE 1 PREMISE 2 CONCLUSION
VALID/SOUND TRUE (POSITIVE)
TRUE(POSITIVE)
TRUE(POSITIVE)
VALID YET ABSURD
FALSE(NEGATIVE)
FALSE(NEGATIVE)
FALSE(NEGATIVE)
VALID(UNSOUND)
TRUE(POSITIVE)
FALSE(NEGATIVE)
TRUE(POSITIVE)
VALID ARGUMENTS
![Page 22: Logic: as tool of Philosophy](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062309/56814541550346895db20b70/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
INVALID ARGUMENTS
PREMISE 1 PREMISE 2 CONCLUSION
INVALID TRUE TRUE FALSE
INVALID ARGUMENTS