Whatever is illegal is immoral. Murder is illegal. Thus murder is immoral. premises conclusion ! Premises are the given information we start with – our reasons in support of the conclusion.
Whatever is illegal is immoral. Murder is illegal. Thus murder is immoral. premises conclusion ! Premises are the given information we start with – our reasons in support of the conclusion. ! The conclusion is what we are trying to establish.
of . . . ! Assume for the sake of argument that . . . ! We all know that . . . conclusions ! Therefore . . . ! Thus . . . ! So we can see that . . . ! It follows that . . .
my client was not at the scene of the crime. Furthermore, the chief prosecution witness is a known perjurer. Thus my client is not guilty. in standard form My client was not at the scene of the crime. The chief prosecution witness is a known perjurer. My client is not guilty.
is because whoever steals land or gold, enslaves people or kills innocent people is a criminal and he did all of the these things. in standard form Whoever steals land or gold, enslaves people or kills innocent people is a criminal. Christopher Columbus did all of the these things. Christopher Columbus was a criminal.
arguments are both valid and sound. definition: In a valid argument, if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. definition: A sound argument is a valid argument with premises that are really true.
a human being. Whoever is going to die worries about dying occasionally. Socrates worries about dying occasionally. If the premises are true must the conclusion also be true?
a human being. Whoever is going to die worries about dying occasionally. Socrates worries about dying occasionally. If the premises are true must the conclusion also be true? YES, this argument is VALID.
illegal. Abortion is wrong. Abortion should be illegal. Can the premises both be true and the conclusion be false? No. The only way for the conclusion to be false is if at least one of the premises were false, so this argument is VALID.
illegal. Abortion is wrong. Abortion should be illegal. Can the premises both be true and the conclusion be false? No. The only way for the conclusion to be false is if at least one of the premises were false, so this argument is VALID. But is it sound?
situation, case, or scenario in which the premises of an argument are true and the conclusion is false. ! Counterexamples prove than an argument is invalid.
situation, case, or scenario in which the premises of an argument are true and the conclusion is false. ! Counterexamples prove than an argument is invalid. ! Any case will do, as long it it describes a situation in which all premises are true and the conclusion false.
situation, case, or scenario in which the premises of an argument are true and the conclusion is false. ! Counterexamples prove than an argument is invalid. ! Any case will do, as long it it describes a situation in which all premises are true and the conclusion false. ! If an argument is valid, there are no counterexamples – every case with a false conclusion will have at least one false premise.
T Claudette is in France. T Thus Claudette is in Paris. counterexample ! There is only one Paris and it is in France (we are ignoring Paris, Texas here).
T Claudette is in France. T Thus Claudette is in Paris. F counterexample ! There is only one Paris and it is in France (we are ignoring Paris, Texas here). ! Claudette is currently in Marseilles, France.
It costs a lot of money to buy first class airline tickets. So poor people do not fly first class except in unusual circumstances. This argument is VALID.
It costs a lot of money to buy first class airline tickets. So poor people do not fly first class except in unusual circumstances. This argument is VALID. The first premise is true by definition, the second is true in fact.
It costs a lot of money to buy first class airline tickets. So poor people do not fly first class except in unusual circumstances. This argument is VALID. The first premise is true by definition, the second is true in fact. Thus this argument is SOUND, the conclusion is really true.
If you do not have something, you must not want it. So poor people are poor of their own free will, because they want to be poor. Are both premises of this argument true?
If you do not have something, you must not want it. So poor people are poor of their own free will, because they want to be poor. Are both premises of this argument true? The first premise is true by definition.
If you do not have something, you must not want it. So poor people are poor of their own free will, because they want to be poor. Are both premises of this argument true? The first premise is true by definition. The second premise is false – so this argument is UNSOUND, even though it is VALID.
illegal. Abortion is wrong. Abortion should be illegal. This is a VALID argument, but are the premises really true? The second premise might be true but needs more support.
illegal. Abortion is wrong. Abortion should be illegal. This is a VALID argument, but are the premises really true? The second premise might be true but needs more support. The first premise is false – not all that is wrong should be illegal, can you think of an example?
illegal. Abortion is wrong. Abortion should be illegal. This is a VALID argument, but are the premises really true? The second premise might be true but needs more support. The first premise is false – not all that is wrong should be illegal, can you think of an example? This argument is UNSOUND.
geoslack
signer
fbei_ot
pokotyamu
matleenalaakso
asial_edu
asial_corp
pnuslide
karlov
takashi_toyosaki
addyosmani
eitanlees
paigeccino
trishagee
jacobian
mza
paulrobertlloyd
edds
soudai
shlominoach
bermonpainter
panda_program
