PHILOSOPHY 101: INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC

LECTURE NOTES

LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC AND ARGUMENTS

I. WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY?
A. "Philosophy" comes from the Greek "" (love, friend) +
"" (of wisdom). There are two main ways of using the word
philosophy.
1. The study of the most general and abstract features
of the world and categories with which we think: mind,
matter, reason, proof, truth, etc. (Oxford Dictionary of
Philosophy, Blackburn, 2nd edition, p. 275) This is the way in
which we will use philosophy in this course.
2. A way of thinking about virtually anything. E.g., Whats your
philosophy concerning the BCS bowl series? We will not
generally be using the term philosophy in this way in this
course.
B. There are many branches of or disciplines within philosophy:
1. Metaphysics A. Theory of being (ontology), reality and
the nature of things [e.g., What (is the nature of what) exists?
Does God or soul exist? What is mind?]; B. Freedom of the will
v. determinism (divine and/or physical); and C. Personal
identity questions.
2. Epistemology Theory of knowledge (e.g., What can I
know? Is knowledge possible? Is knowledge true, justified
belief?)
3. Ethics Theory of the best way in which to live, right and
wrong, and/or happiness (How should I best live? How should
we (family, State, nation, world) best live? What is
happiness?)
4. Logic Reasoning and the study of (formal or informal)
arguments
5. Social/Political Philosophy Theory of justice or how best
to run a state (What is the best form of government? Do
people have rights?)
6. Aesthetics Theory of beauty (What is beauty? Is beauty
objective, or only in the eye of the beholder? What is
offensive, obscene, etc? What is art?)
7. "Philosophy of": Language, Religion, Psychology, Mind,
Science, Biology, and Mathematics.

8.

Philosophy by region, group, or time period - E.g.,

Western Philosophy, Eastern (or Asian) Philosophy, and
Feminist Philosophy; Ancient (to 300 CE), Medieval (300-1600
CE), Modern (1600-1900 CE), and Contemporary Philosophy
(1900 to Now).

II. WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?

A.

An Argument = A set of at least one premise and one

conclusion. For example:

1. All humans are mortal.

2. Arnold (Swartzenegger) is a human.
C: Arnold is mortal.

B.

The Conclusion = The statement that you are (or someone

else is) trying to prove ("C" above).
C. Premise / Premiss = The statement(s) that are supposed
to prove the conclusion ("1" and "2" above).
D. There are two evaluations that can be made of deductive
arguments: Validity and Soundness.
1. Validity = If the premises are true, the conclusion
must follow.
2. Soundness = An argument that is valid (see above)
and whose premises are in fact true. If a deductive
argument is sound, then it is a good argument. One should
not use sound or valid of individual premises or
conclusions (or groups of premises or groups of conclusions).
3. So it follows from these definitions that there is such
a thing as an argument that is valid but not sound [that
is, the conclusion follows from the premises (assuming theyre
true), but at least one premise is not true]. For example (EX):

1. If the moon is made of green cheese, then water

freezes at 32 degrees F.
2. The moon is made of green cheese.
C: Water freezes at 32 degrees F.

E. Some Different Types of Arguments:

1. Deductive Arguments: The premises completely or
totally prove the conclusion. There are five different types
of Deductive Arguments: (1) Mathematical arguments (3 >
2; 2 > 1; therefore 3 > 1); (2) Definitions (A bachelor is an
unmarried male; Timmy is an unmarried male; therefore
Timmy is a bachelor); (3) Categorical Syllogisms (e.g.,
Arnold example above); (4) Hypothetical Syllogisms (Water
example); (5) Disjunctive Syllogisms (Either Im alive or I'm
dead; I'm not dead; therefore Im alive).
2. Inductive Arguments: The premises partially prove
the conclusion. There are six different types of Inductive
Arguments: (1) Generalizations (see emerald example); (2)
Argument from Authority (An astro-physicist said that our
galaxy might be 50% larger than recently thought; therefore it
probably is such); (3) Signs (you see a sign for the BP
building and infer that this must be the BP building); (4)
Causal Inference (A causes B; A occurs, therefore B occurs);
(5) Arguments by Analogy (see below); (6) Prediction (see
emerald example below).
Inductive arguments go from premises that show the way the
past has been to support the way in which the future will be.
Generalization and Prediction EX:
1.
2.

Every emerald Ive ever seen is green. So:

Emeralds are green [Generalization] or The next
emerald I see will be green [Prediction].

In order to be accurate, statistical induction

(Generalization, Signs, Causal Inference, &
Prediction) must meet three criteria:
(1) A large sample of data from which to generalize;
(2) A representative sample; and
(3) A random sample.

Inductive arguments are assessed based on Cogency

and Strength. There are three criteria for inductive
cogency and strength:
(1) The argument is inductively valid (cogency);
(2) All its premises are warranted (strength); and
(3) No relevant information has been omitted (strength).

3.

Arguments by Analogy: A good or strong argument by

analogy occurs when the analogous example is
relevantly similar to the desired conclusion of the
argument. EX: "Just as it is morally obligatory for someone to
save a drowning child while walking past a pond, when the
water is only knee deep and little effort will be necessary, it is
morally obligatory that each person who has enough money
to sustain him or herself gives some money to relieve world
hunger." (paraphrase of Peter Singer's argument).
The way to make a good argument by analogy is to make the
example relevantly similar to the argument. The only way to
attack these arguments by analogy is to prove that there is a
significant difference between the analogous case (i.e., in the
above example, the drowning child) and the case being
argued for (i.e., in the above example, world hunger
donation).