Inductive Logic - Unit 2
45 Questions
0 Views

Choose a study mode

Play Quiz
Study Flashcards
Spaced Repetition
Chat to Lesson

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What does inductive logic evaluate in an argument?

  • If the premises guarantee the conclusion
  • If the premises make the conclusion probable (correct)
  • The truth of the premises only
  • The necessity of the conclusion
  • Which statement correctly describes a cogent argument?

  • It is always deductively valid.
  • It cannot have any false premises.
  • It has all true premises and is strong. (correct)
  • It weakly supports its conclusion.
  • What defines a weak argument in inductive logic?

  • It contains all true premises.
  • It has a strong inference from premises to conclusion.
  • It is not probable that the conclusion follows from the premises. (correct)
  • It guarantees the conclusion if the premises are true.
  • What is a characteristic of deductive validity?

    <p>It guarantees the conclusion if premises are true. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    How does the strength of an inductive argument change?

    <p>By adding new premises. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In statistical syllogism, what is necessary for the conclusion to be probable?

    <p>The percentage of the first group must be at least 50% (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does it mean if an argument is uncogent?

    <p>It either has weak support or at least one false premise. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What distinguishes inductive reasoning from deductive reasoning?

    <p>Inductive reasoning involves evaluating probabilities. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is a characteristic of a strong inductive argument?

    <p>The sample is random and of appropriate size. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which method of Mill's Methods involves looking for a common factor present with an effect?

    <p>Method of agreement (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does a sufficient condition imply in the context of Mill's Methods?

    <p>Its presence ensures the event will occur. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What distinguishes a cogent argument in inductive reasoning?

    <p>It is based on well-supported premises leading to a strong conclusion. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of these options best represents a fallacy in inductive reasoning?

    <p>Overgeneralization from a small sample. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the result of applying the method of difference in Mill's Methods?

    <p>Establish a cause by showing its absence with the effect. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which is necessary for a valid statistical syllogism?

    <p>It requires a random sample leading to an accurate conclusion. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In what situation would the method of agreement be ineffective?

    <p>When multiple factors cause the same outcome. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is a characteristic that strengthens a statistical syllogism?

    <p>A high percentage in the generalization (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following is an example of the fallacy of incomplete evidence?

    <p>Ignoring data that contradicts a popular belief (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does the argument from authority rely on?

    <p>The authority's reliability on the subject (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which option indicates a misstep when using an argument from authority?

    <p>Relying on a person with no expertise in the area (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which statement expresses a characteristic of the fallacy of incomplete evidence?

    <p>It can occur due to ignorance or lack of investigation (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In statistical syllogisms, what determines the strength of the reference class to the attribute class?

    <p>The relevance of the reference class (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is a consequence of relying solely on an induction by enumeration?

    <p>It can overlook exceptions in the class (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    How can an argument from authority be weakened?

    <p>By quoting the opinion of an authority without context (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is an enthymeme?

    <p>An argument that leaves some premises or conclusions implicit. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In an argument diagram, what does an arrow from premise to conclusion represent?

    <p>The conclusion depends on the premise for support. (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    How can sub-conclusions be incorporated in argument diagrams?

    <p>They can be indicated as supporting statements in the diagram. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following best describes a charitable interpretation of an argument?

    <p>Attempting to understand and reconstruct an argument in its best light. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary function of diagrams in arguments?

    <p>To simplify complex arguments and demonstrate relationships between statements. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What should be prioritized when reconstructing an argument?

    <p>The original meaning and rationality of the author (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Why is it important to distinguish between sub-conclusions and final conclusions in an argument?

    <p>Confusing the two can lead to flawed reasoning (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is a key characteristic of a well-crafted argument reconstruction?

    <p>It makes implicit premises explicit in a charitable manner (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following illustrates a charitable interpretation of an argument?

    <p>Maintaining the original intent while clarifying statements (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the provided argument, what is the final conclusion?

    <p>Removing organs from a healthy person is not moral. (B)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which choice best defines an implicit premise in a given argument?

    <p>An assumption that is taken for granted without being stated (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary risk of misinterpreting an argument?

    <p>It may inspire acceptance of false beliefs (C)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which statement correctly identifies a flaw in an unfair rendition of an argument?

    <p>It introduces irrelevant concepts that distort the argument. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following best illustrates the role of hedges in arguments?

    <p>Hedges allow for ambiguity and uncertainty in conclusions. (A), Hedges contribute to the validity and soundness of an argument. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    When formulating an argument, why is it important to employ uniform language?

    <p>To highlight the logical form of reasoning throughout the argument. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following demonstrates the difference between a sub-conclusion and a final conclusion?

    <p>A sub-conclusion supports the final conclusion and is based on specific premises. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the importance of identifying implicit premises in an argument?

    <p>They provide a clearer understanding of the argument's structure and logic. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following accurately describes a potential flaw in argument diagrams?

    <p>They may fail to illustrate the relationships among premises effectively. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Why is charitable interpretation important in evaluating arguments?

    <p>It ensures misinterpretations are avoided by maximizing understanding. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which statement reflects the challenge posed by informal language in rational arguments?

    <p>It may introduce ambiguity that obscures the argument's intent. (A)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In which scenario might an assurance or hedge enhance the cogency of an argument?

    <p>When the strength of the claim depends on subjective perception. (D)</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Flashcards

    Inductive Logic

    A type of logic that studies methods for evaluating arguments where the premises make the conclusion probable, but do not guarantee it.

    Deductive Logic

    A type of logic that studies methods for evaluating whether premises guarantee the conclusion.

    Strong Inductive Argument

    An argument where it's likely (but not certain) that if the premises are true, the conclusion is true.

    Weak Inductive Argument

    An argument where it's unlikely that if the premises are true, the conclusion is true.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Cogent Argument

    A strong inductive argument with all true premises.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Statistical Syllogism

    A type of inductive argument where a percentage of a group has a certain characteristic, and a specific case in that group is considered.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Inductive Strength

    The degree to which an inductive argument is likely to have a true conclusion if its premises are true. This is different from deductive logic, which is either valid or invalid; and it is measured on a spectrum from likely to unlikely.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Uncogent Argument

    A weak inductive argument or a strong inductive argument with at least one false premise.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Induction by Enumeration

    A type of inductive argument based on a sample to make generalizations about the whole population. It assumes the sample is representative of the population.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Random Sample

    A sample where every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Appropriate Sample Size

    The size of the sample must be large enough to be representative of the population. Larger samples are more accurate.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Method of Agreement

    Identifying a common factor (A) present whenever the effect (B) is present. This suggests A may cause B.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Method of Difference

    Comparing two cases: one with the effect (B) and one without (B). If the suspected cause (C) is absent when the effect (B) is absent, it supports C as a possible cause.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Sufficient Condition

    If X occurs, Y will always occur. X is enough to guarantee Y, but Y can happen without X.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Necessary Condition

    Y can only happen if X occurs. X is required for Y, but Y doesn't necessarily mean X happened.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Joint Method

    Combines the method of agreement and method of difference to strengthen the argument that A causes B.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Percentage Standard

    The closeness of the percentage in the general claim to the conclusion determines the strength of the statistical syllogism. The closer the percentage, the stronger the argument.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Relevance Standard

    The relevance of the reference class to the attribute class impacts the strength of a statistical syllogism. The more relevant, the stronger the argument.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence

    A logical error where an arguer fails to consider all relevant evidence when choosing the reference class for a statistical syllogism, weakening the argument.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Argument from Authority

    An argument that relies on the credibility of a source to support a claim. For example: 'Dr. Smith, a renowned cardiologist, says smoking is harmful. Therefore, smoking is harmful.'

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Reliable Authority

    A source of information that is trustworthy and knowledgeable about the subject at hand.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Fallacy of Misquoting or Misinterpreting

    A logical error where an argument from authority is weakened by misrepresenting or misinterpreting what the authority actually said.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Enthymeme

    An argument with an implied premise or conclusion, often found in everyday conversations or texts.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Argument Diagram

    A visual representation of an argument's structure, showing how premises support the conclusion.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Premise Indicator

    A word or phrase that signals a premise in an argument, such as 'because', 'since', or 'for'.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Conclusion Indicator

    A word or phrase that signals the conclusion of an argument, such as 'therefore', 'so', or 'thus'.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Sub-Conclusion

    A premise that supports another premise, rather than directly supporting the main conclusion.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Fair Reconstruction

    A faithful interpretation of an argument that accurately reflects the author's original meaning, intent, and reasoning.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Unfair Rendition

    A misrepresentation of an argument that distorts the original meaning, often by using misleading language or rephrasing the argument in a way that weakens or changes its intended conclusion.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Charitable Interpretation

    Interpreting an argument in a way that assumes the author is making a reasonable and logical point, even if their argument has flaws or needs clarification.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Preserve Rationality

    When interpreting an argument, it's best to choose the meaning that makes the author's reasoning as logical and valid as possible.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Sub-conclusion vs. Final Conclusion

    A sub-conclusion is a conclusion reached within an argument that supports a larger, overall conclusion (final conclusion). Ensure you don't mistake a sub-conclusion for the main point.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Explicit vs. Implicit Premises

    Explicit premises are stated openly in an argument, while implicit premises are assumed or implied but not directly stated. Ensure to make implicit premises clear and understandable in a charitable way.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Make premises explicit

    When analyzing an argument, it's crucial to identify and clearly state any unstated premises (implicit assumptions) in a way that is faithful to the author's intended meaning.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Charitable Way

    When making implicit premises explicit, strive to interpret the author's intentions in a way that is as reasonable and logical as possible, even if their reasoning has flaws.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Hedges

    Words or phrases that weaken the strength of a claim, making it less assertive. Examples include 'maybe,' 'perhaps,' 'it seems that,' and 'in my opinion.'

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Assurances

    Words or phrases that strengthen a claim, making it more assertive. Examples include 'definitely,' 'certainly,' and 'without a doubt.'

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Uniform Language

    Using the same terms or concepts consistently throughout an argument to maintain logical connections between premises and conclusions.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    What is the purpose of uniform language in arguments?

    To maintain a consistent logical structure within an argument by using the same terms or concepts throughout, making the reasoning clear and avoiding potential confusion.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Logical Link

    The connection between premises and conclusion in an argument, where the premises provide evidence or support for the conclusion.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Example of a Logical Link

    In the argument 'All dogs are mammals. Fido is a dog. Therefore, Fido is a mammal,' the premise 'All dogs are mammals' logically links to the conclusion 'Fido is a mammal.'

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Why is it important to have a logical link?

    A logical link ensures that the conclusion follows logically from the premises, making the argument more convincing and less vulnerable to logical fallacies.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Well-Crafted Argument

    An argument presented in a clear and concise way, employing uniform language, logical links, and a well-defined structure to enhance its persuasiveness.

    Signup and view all the flashcards

    Study Notes

    Inductive Logic - Unit 2

    • Logic is the study of methods for evaluating if the premises of an argument adequately support the conclusion
    • Two types of logic:
      • Deductive logic: Studies methods for evaluating whether the premises guarantee the conclusion.
      • Inductive logic: Studies methods for evaluating whether the premises make the conclusion probable, without guaranteeing it.
    • Inductive logic focuses on evaluating arguments for strength and weakness.
    • A strong argument makes it probable that, if the premises are true, then the conclusion is also true
    • A weak argument does not make it probable that, if the premises are true, then the conclusion is also true.
    • A cogent argument is a strong argument in which all of the premises are true.
    • An uncogent argument is either weak or strong, but with at least one false premise.

    Statistical Syllogism

    • In a statistical syllogism:

      • A percentage of A are B
      • C is an A
      • So, C is a B -Where x is between 50-100 exclusive
    • The strength of an inductive argument is determined by statistical syllogism.

    • In statistical syllogism, the percentage is greater than 50 and less than 100.

    • The statistical generalization need not be stated numerically; phrases like "almost all," "most," "very often," or "hardly ever" are frequently used.

    Two Standards of the Strength of Statistical Syllogisms

    • Percentage: The closer the percentage in the generalization is to 100%, the stronger the statistical syllogism is (a is a G, a is a non-G)
    • Relevance of the reference class to the attribute class

    Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence (Cherry-picking)

    • The fallacy of incomplete evidence is committed when one fails to consider all available relevant evidence when choosing the reference class for one's statistical syllogism.
    • Arguments can appear strong when they could be weak because relevant information has been omitted.

    Arguments from Authority

    • Is the authority reliable in the subject at issue?

    • Are there other authorities who assert the opposite?

    • Is the authority being misquoted or misinterpreted?

      • Reliable authorities can make mistakes

    Arguments from Enumeration

    • A conclusion about all members of a class (population) is derived from premises about observed members of that class.
      • Example: Eighty-two percent of a random sample of 200 UTECH students are sleep-deprived. Therefore, approximately 82% of UTECH students are sleep-deprived.
      • Criteria: -Is the sample random? -Is the sample of an appropriate size? -Is the sample inaccurate due to psychological factors (e.g., the questions asked)?

    Mill's Methods

    • Methods for concluding that A causes B.
      • Method of agreement: identifying a common factor present whenever the effect (B) is present
      • Method of difference: comparing cases where an event occurs and a case where it does not occur
      • Joint method: combining the methods of agreement and difference
      • Method of concomitant variation: showing that as one factor varies, another varies in a corresponding way
      • Method of residues: "subtracting out" known cause and attributing the rest to a new cause.

    Scientific Way of Reasoning

    • Mill's methods inform scientific reasoning by:
      • Describing the problem
      • Formulating hypothesis.
      • Testing the hypothesis

    Arguments from Analogy

    • Structure:

      • A is similar to B
      • B has property P
      • Therefore A has property P.
    • Assessing analogies:

      • What are the relevant similarities between A and B?
      • Are there relevant differences?
      • Are there other things similar to B (except A) that share or do not share property P?
    • Analogies are often use in moral and legal reasoning.

    Studying That Suits You

    Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

    Quiz Team

    Related Documents

    Inductive Logic Unit 2 PDF

    Description

    Explore Unit 2 of Inductive Logic, focusing on the evaluation of arguments and the distinction between strong, weak, cogent, and uncogent arguments. Learn about statistical syllogisms and how statistics can support logical conclusions. This quiz will test your understanding of these vital concepts in logic.

    More Like This

    Comm 311 - Ch. 6 Flashcards
    15 questions
    Logic and Critical Thinking Quiz
    53 questions
    Inductive Logic Overview
    10 questions

    Inductive Logic Overview

    MomentousTiger2910 avatar
    MomentousTiger2910
    Use Quizgecko on...
    Browser
    Browser