Logic Basics and Argument Types

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What distinguishes a deductive argument from an inductive argument?

Deductive arguments lead to certain conclusions if the premises are true. (correct)

Inductive arguments are either valid or invalid.

Inductive arguments solely rely on mathematical proof.

Deductive arguments provide probable conclusions based on evidence.

Which of the following best defines cognitive bias?

The tendency to search for, interpret, and remember information that confirms one's preconceptions.

A systematic error in thinking that affects the decisions and judgments that people make. (correct)

A logical fallacy that occurs when the premise does not support the conclusion.

An appeal to the majority opinion as a means of validation.

What is the main characteristic of a formal fallacy?

It arises from a flaw in the argument's structure or form. (correct)

It involves emotional manipulation to sway opinion.

It is primarily based on anecdotal evidence.

It occurs due to the actual content of the argument.

Which fallacy involves attacking the person rather than addressing the argument?

Ad hominem Signup and view all the answers

What is an example of a hidden assumption in argument mapping?

An unstated premise that must be true for the conclusion to hold. Signup and view all the answers

Which type of argument is characterized by whether the premises provide conclusive support for the conclusion?

Deductive argument Signup and view all the answers

All premises in an argument must be true for the argument to be considered sound.

True Signup and view all the answers

What is the term for a reasoning error where the argument attacks the person instead of the argument?

Ad hominem Signup and view all the answers

The bias that involves giving undue weight to the first piece of information encountered is known as ___ bias.

anchoring and adjustment Signup and view all the answers

Match the type of fallacy with its definition:

Straw Figure = Misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to attack Red Herring = Distracting from the argument by introducing an irrelevant topic Slippery Slope = Arguing that a small first step will lead to a chain of related events Hasty Generalization = Making a conclusion based on insufficient evidence Signup and view all the answers

Which type of bias involves favoring information that confirms existing beliefs?

Confirmation bias Signup and view all the answers

A complex proposition is fundamentally different from a simple proposition.

True Signup and view all the answers

Name one way credibility of an information source can be assessed.

Expertise or authority in the field Signup and view all the answers

Modus ___ is a valid argument form that states if P, then Q; P is true, therefore Q is true.

ponens Signup and view all the answers

Match the types of arguments to their characteristics:

Deductive = Argument that provides strong support but not conclusive Inductive = Argument that guarantees the conclusion if premises are true Signup and view all the answers

Which term describes a reasoning method based on rule-of-thumb strategies?

Heuristic Signup and view all the answers

A sound argument must be valid and all its premises are true.

True Signup and view all the answers

What is the difference between a premise and a conclusion?

A premise supports an argument while the conclusion is the claim being argued. Signup and view all the answers

In an argument, the ___ conveys the main point being argued based on premises.

conclusion Signup and view all the answers

Match the fallacies with their descriptions:

Ad hominem = Attacks the person instead of addressing the argument Red Herring = Distracts from the main issue with unrelated information Appeal to Authority = Arguments based on the authority of the person rather than the argument itself Post hoc = Assumes that one event caused another merely because it preceded it Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is an example of a fallacy of relevance?

Ad Hominem Signup and view all the answers

An inductive argument provides conclusive proof for its conclusion.

False Signup and view all the answers

What is a hidden assumption in argument mapping?

An unstated belief that is taken for granted in the argument. Signup and view all the answers

A ___ argument claims that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.

deductive Signup and view all the answers

Which type of bias involves interpreting evidence in a way that confirms existing beliefs?

Confirmation Bias Signup and view all the answers

Which type of argument is typically characterized as providing strong but not conclusive support to the conclusion?

Inductive argument Signup and view all the answers

A sound argument can have false premises.

False Signup and view all the answers

What is a common informal fallacy that involves diverting attention from the topic at hand?

Red Herring Signup and view all the answers

The fallacy of ___ involves assuming that because two events occur together, one causes the other.

post hoc Signup and view all the answers

Match the type of fallacy with its description:

Ad hominem = Attacking the character instead of the argument Genetic fallacy = Judging the argument based on its source Straw Figure = Misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to attack Appeal to Force = Using threats to persuade Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is an example of the Principle of Charity?

Interpreting someone's argument in the strongest possible way Signup and view all the answers

All types of biases affect the reliability of information sources.

True Signup and view all the answers

Name one type of informal fallacy.

Appeal to Popularity Signup and view all the answers

A proposition is a statement that can either be ___ or false.

true Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary focus in argument mapping?

Clarifying relationships between premises and conclusions Signup and view all the answers

Match the logical terms with their definitions:

Premise = A statement in an argument that provides support for the conclusion Conclusion = The statement that the argument is trying to prove Valid argument = An argument where if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true Sound argument = A valid argument with all true premises Signup and view all the answers

Match the following types of fallacies with their descriptions:

Ad Hominem = Attacking the person instead of the argument Strawman = Misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to attack False Cause = Assuming that because two events occur together, one causes the other Slippery Slope = Arguing that a small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related events Signup and view all the answers

Match the types of arguments with their characteristics:

Deductive argument = An argument that aims to provide conclusive proof for its conclusion Inductive argument = An argument that provides strong but not conclusive support for its conclusion Causal argument = An argument that claims cause and effect relationships Analogical argument = An argument based on the similarity between two different things Signup and view all the answers

Match the following types of biases with their descriptions:

Confirmation bias = Interpreting evidence in a way that supports existing beliefs Anchoring bias = Giving undue weight to the first piece of information encountered Availability heuristic = Overestimating the likelihood of events based on their availability in memory Hindsight bias = Seeing events as having been predictable after they have already occurred Signup and view all the answers

Match the logical reasoning methodologies with their descriptions:

Modus Ponens = If P, then Q; P is true, therefore Q is true Modus Tollens = If P, then Q; Q is false, therefore P is false Syllogism = A form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two premises Counterexample = An example that disproves a proposition or theory Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Basic Concepts

A proposition is a statement that can be either true or false.
A simple proposition expresses a single thought.
A complex proposition combines multiple propositions.
A non-proposition is a statement that cannot be classified as true or false.
An argument is a set of propositions with the goal of persuading someone of the truth of a specific proposition.
A non-argument is a set of propositions where the goal is not persuasion.
A premise is a proposition that is presented as evidence in an argument.
A conclusion is the proposition that the premises are intended to support.
Truth refers to the correspondence of a proposition with the actual state of affairs.

Types of Arguments

A deductive argument aims to provide conclusive support for its conclusion.
An inductive argument aims to provide probable support for its conclusion.
A valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
An invalid argument is one where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.
A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises.
An unsound argument is a valid argument with at least one false premise or an invalid argument with true premises.
A strong argument is an inductive argument where the premises provide strong support for the conclusion.
A weak argument is an inductive argument where the premises provide weak support for the conclusion.
A cogent argument is a strong inductive argument with true premises.
An uncogent argument is a weak inductive argument or a strong inductive argument with at least one false premise.

Formal/Informal Fallacies

A formal fallacy is an error in the structure of a deductive argument.
An informal fallacy is an error in the content of an argument.
The antecedent is the first part of a conditional statement ("if p").
The consequent is the second part of a conditional statement ("then q").
Modus ponens is a fundamental and well-established valid argument form in logic that is used in deductive reasoning. It can be expressed as follows: If proposition p is true, then proposition q must also be true. Given that p is indeed true, one can conclude logically that q follows. This structure is essential in various fields, including mathematics and philosophy, as it allows for the derivation of conclusions based on known premises.
Modus tollens is another important valid argument form in formal logic. It operates on the principle that if p leads to q, then the negation of q (not q) implies the negation of p (not p). Essentially, if the consequence does not hold, one can conclude that the initial condition cannot be true. This form is crucial in critical thinking and problem-solving, as it helps to eliminate false premises.
Affirming the consequent is an invalid argument form: If p, then q; q, therefore p.
Denying the antecedent is an invalid argument form: If p, then q; not p, therefore not q.
The Fallacy Fallacy occurs when it is argued that because a statement is fallacious, it is therefore false.

Credibility of an Information Source

Credibility refers to the trustworthiness of a source based on its expertise, reputation, and potential biases.

Reliability of an Information Source

Reliability refers to the consistency and accuracy of a source's information.

Types of Biases

Cognitive bias is a systematic error in thinking that influences one's perception and judgment.
Confirmation bias is the tendency to favor information that confirms existing beliefs.
Representativeness bias is the tendency to assume that something belongs to a category based on its similarity to that category's prototype.
Anchoring and adjustment bias is the tendency to over-rely on the first piece of information received.
Availability bias is the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events that are easily recalled.
Selection bias is a sampling error that occurs when the sample is not representative of the population.
Alief is a belief that is held despite knowing that it is false.
A heuristic is a mental shortcut or rule of thumb.
An algorithm bubble is a personalized information filter created by algorithms.
The Principle of Charity is the principle of interpreting arguments in the most favorable way possible.

Argument Mapping

Direct support occurs when a premise directly contributes to the conclusion.
Indirect support occurs when a premise supports a conclusion through another premise.
Independent support occurs when two premises independently support the same conclusion.
Conjoint support occurs when two or more premises are jointly needed to support the conclusion.
Hidden assumptions are unstated premises that are necessary for the argument to be valid.
The main conclusion is the ultimate proposition that the argument aims to prove.
The main premise is the premise that provides the most direct support for the main conclusion.
A sub-inference is a smaller argument that is part of a larger argument.
A sub-premise is a premise that supports a sub-conclusion.
A sub-conclusion is a conclusion that is reached in a sub-inference.

Informal Fallacies

Fallacies of Relevance

Ad hominem is an attack on the person making an argument, rather than addressing the argument itself.
Genetic fallacy is the attempt to discredit an idea based on its origin.
Straw Figure is misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.
Red Herring is introducing a irrelevant topic to distract from the original argument.
Appeal to Authority is citing an authority figure as evidence when their expertise is not relevant.
Appeal to Force is using threats or coercion to force someone to accept an argument.
Appeal to Popularity is arguing that a claim must be true because it's popular.
Appeal to Consequences is arguing that a claim must be false or true because of the consequences of it being true or false.
Equivocation is using a word with multiple meanings to mislead the listener.

Fallacies of Weak Induction

Appeal to ignorance is arguing that a claim must be true because it hasn't been proven false (or vice versa).
Slippery Slope is arguing that one event will inevitably lead to a chain of other events, ultimately ending in a negative outcome.
Texas Sharpshooter is using data selectively to fit a pre-existing conclusion.
Post hoc is assuming that because A happened before B, then A must have caused B.
Hasty Generalization is drawing a conclusion about an entire group based on a small or unrepresentative sample.

Fallacies of Presumption

False Dilemma is presenting only two options when there are actually more than two.
Begging the Question is assuming the truth of the conclusion in the premise.
Burden of Proof Shifting is placing the burden of proof on the person who is challenging a claim.

Basic Concepts

A proposition is a statement that can be either true or false.
A simple proposition contains only one idea and cannot be broken down into simpler parts.
A complex proposition is made up of two or more simple propositions joined together by logical connectors.
A non-proposition is a statement that cannot be classified as true or false, such as a question, a command, or an exclamation.
Arguments present reasons for believing a particular claim.
A non-argument is simply a statement of fact, opinion, or belief that does not offer any reasons to support it.
A premise is a statement that is offered as evidence or support for a conclusion.
A conclusion is the statement that the premises are intended to support.
Truth refers to the accuracy or correspondence of a statement to reality.

Types of Arguments

Deductive arguments aim to provide logically conclusive support for their conclusions.
Inductive arguments aim to provide probable support for their conclusions.
Valid arguments are logically sound. If the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.
Invalid arguments have a form that fails to logically connect the premises to the conclusion.
Sound arguments are valid and have true premises.
Unsound arguments are either invalid or have at least one false premise.
Strong inductive arguments provide a high degree of probability for their conclusions.
Weak inductive arguments provide a low degree of probability for their conclusions.
Cogent arguments are strong and have true premises.
Uncogent arguments are either weak or have at least one false premise.

Formal and Informal Fallacies

Formal fallacies are errors in the logical structure of the argument.
Informal fallacies are errors in the content of the argument, such as using irrelevant information or making faulty assumptions.
Antecedent is the part of a conditional statement that comes before the "if".
Consequent is the part of a conditional statement that comes after the "then".
Modus ponens is a valid deductive argument that affirms the antecedent.
Modus tollens is a valid deductive argument that denies the consequent.
Affirming the consequent is an invalid deductive argument that affirms the consequent.
Denying the antecedent is an invalid deductive argument that denies the antecedent.
The Fallacy Fallacy is the error of assuming that an argument must be false just because it contains a fallacy.

Credibility and Reliability of Information Sources

Credibility refers to the trustworthiness or believability of an information source.
Reliability refers to the consistency and accuracy of an information source.

Types of Biases

Cognitive biases are systematic errors in thinking that can lead to faulty judgments.
Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out and favor information that confirms existing beliefs.
Representativeness bias is the tendency to judge the likelihood of events based on how similar they are to existing prototypes.
Anchoring and adjustment bias is the tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information received.
Availability bias is the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events that are easily recalled or available in memory.
Selection bias occurs when the sample data used to make inferences is not representative of the population.
Alief is a belief that is accepted as true despite contradictory evidence.
Heuristics are mental shortcuts or rules of thumb that help us make quick judgments. They can sometimes lead to cognitive biases.
Algorithm bubbles are personalized information filters that can reinforce existing biases and limit exposure to diverse perspectives.
The Principle of Charity is the assumption that people are generally rational and trying to communicate their beliefs accurately.

Argument Mapping

Direct support refers to a premise that directly supports the conclusion.
Indirect support refers to a premise that supports another premise that in turn supports the conclusion.
Independent support refers to two or more premises that both support the conclusion, but neither depends on the other.
Conjoint support refers to two or more premises that support the conclusion only when taken together.
Hidden assumptions are unstated premises that are necessary for the argument to work.
Main conclusion is the final claim that the argument is trying to support.
Main premise is the main piece of evidence that supports the argument.
Sub-inference/ Sub-premise are arguments/ premises that support the main conclusion or main premise.
Sub-conclusion is a conclusion within an argument used to support a higher-level conclusion.

Fallacies of Relevance

Ad hominem attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument itself.
Genetic fallacy dismisses an argument based on its origin or source rather than its merits.
Straw Figure misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.
Red Herring introduces irrelevant information to distract from the main issue.
Appeal to Authority uses an authority figure's opinion as evidence, even if the authority is not an expert in the relevant field.
Appeal to Force threatens the listener into accepting the argument.
Appeal to Popularity argues that something is true because many people believe it.
Appeal to Consequences argues that something is true because it would be good if it were true, or false because it would be bad if it were true.
Equivocation uses a word or phrase with multiple meanings in a way that creates ambiguity.

Fallacies of Weak Induction

Appeal to Ignorance argues that a claim is true because it has not been proven false, or false because it has not been proven true.
Slippery Slope argues that taking one action will lead to a chain of events ending in an undesirable outcome.
Texas Sharpshooter selectively chooses data to support a pre-existing conclusion.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc assumes that because B happened after A, A must have caused B.
Hasty Generalization draws a broad conclusion from a small or unrepresentative sample.

Fallacies of Presumption

False Dilemma presents two options as the only possibilities, when there may be other options.
Begging the Question assumes the truth of the conclusion in the premises.
Burden of Proof Shifting places the burden of proof on the opponent to disprove the claim, rather than providing evidence to support the claim.

Selection Bias

Occurs when a sample is not representative of the larger population.
Can lead to inaccurate conclusions.

Heuristic

A mental shortcut or rule of thumb used to make decisions or solve problems quickly.
Can be helpful but can also lead to biases.

Principle of Charity

Interprets an argument in the most favorable light possible.
Aims to understand the author's intended meaning.

Proposition

A declarative sentence that can be true or false.
Expresses a belief, opinion, or fact.

Non-Proposition

A sentence that cannot be true or false.
Examples include questions, commands, and exclamations.

Argument

A set of propositions, at least one of which is intended to provide support for another proposition.
Contains premises and a conclusion.

Non-Argument

A set of propositions that do not include a claim of support.
Examples include summaries, descriptions, or reports.

Premise

A proposition that is offered as support for the conclusion.
Found at the start of an argument.

Conclusion

The proposition that is being supported by the premises.
Found at the end of an argument.

Direct Support

When a premise directly supports the conclusion.
Can be seen as a direct link.

Indirect Support

When a premise supports another premise, which in turn supports the conclusion.
An indirect connection to the conclusion.

Independent Support

When multiple premises independently support the conclusion.
Each premise provides separate reasoning for the conclusion.

Conjoint Support

Multiple premises work together to support the conclusion.
The individual premises are not strong enough to support the conclusion by themselves.

Hidden Assumptions

Unstated premises that are needed for the argument to be valid.
Can be difficult to identify.

Deductive Argument

Aims to provide logically conclusive support for the conclusion.
If the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.

Inductive Argument

Aims to provide probable support for the conclusion.
If the premises are true, then the conclusion is likely to be true.

Valid/Invalid

Used to assess the logical structure of deductive arguments.
If an argument is valid, then the conclusion follows logically from the premises.

Sound/Unsound

Used to assess deductive arguments based on the truth of the premises and the logical structure.
A sound argument is both valid and has true premises.

Strong/Weak

Used to assess inductive arguments based on the strength of the probabilistic support offered for the conclusion.
A strong inductive argument has a high probability of the conclusion being true.

Cogent/Uncogent

Used to measure the strength of argument based on three factors: a strong inductive argument, true premises, and a conclusion that is not defeated by other information.

Formal/Informal Fallacies

Formal fallacies are errors in the logical structure of arguments.
Informal fallacies are errors in the content of an argument.

Informal Fallacy

Errors in reasoning that do not involve mistakes in the form of the argument, but rather in the content of the argument.

Formal Fallacy

Errors in the form of an argument.
Examples include affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent.

Antecedent

The first part of a conditional statement (if...then...).
Represents the condition.

Consequent

The second part of a conditional statement (if...then...).
Represents the outcome.

Modus Ponens

A valid argument form:
- If P, then Q. (Premise)
- P (Premise)
- Therefore, Q (Conclusion)

Modus Tollens

A valid argument form:
- If P, then Q (Premise)
- Not Q (Premise)
- Therefore, not P (Conclusion)

Affirming the Consequent

An invalid argument form:
- If P, then Q (Premise)
- Q (Premise)
- Therefore, P (Conclusion)

Denying the Antecedent

An invalid argument form:
- If P, then Q (Premise)
- Not P (Premise)
- Therefore, not Q (Conclusion)

The Fallacy Fallacy

The error of assuming that because an argument contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false.
It's important to remember that fallacies are errors in reasoning, not guarantees that the conclusion is false.

Credibility of an Information Source

Refers to the trustworthiness of a source.
Factors include the source's expertise, reputation, and objectivity.

Reliability of an Information Source

Refers to the consistency and accuracy of a source.
Factors include the source's use of evidence, methods, and the ability to be replicated.

Types of Biases

Confirmation bias: Seeking out information that confirms existing beliefs.
Availability heuristic: Overestimating the likelihood of events based on how easily examples come to mind.
Anchoring bias: Overreliance on the first piece of information received.
Framing effect: Decisions influenced by the way information is presented.

Fallacies of Relevance

Fallacies that use irrelevant information to support a conclusion.

Ad Hominem

Attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument itself.

Genetic Fallacy

Argues that the origin of an idea or belief is a reason to reject it.

Straw Figure

Misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.

Red Herring

Introduces an irrelevant topic to distract from the main issue.

Appeal to Authority

Relies on an authority figure to support a claim, without providing relevant reasons.

Appeal to Force

Uses threats or intimidation to get someone to accept a claim.

Appeal to Popularity

Argues that a claim is true because it is popular or widely believed.

Appeal to Consequences

Argue that a claim is true because it would have desirable consequences.

Equivocation

Uses a word in two different senses in an argument.

Fallacies of Weak Induction

Fallacies that use weak or insufficient evidence to support a conclusion.

Appeal to Ignorance

Argues that a claim is true because it hasn't been proven false.

Slippery Slope

Assumes that one event will inevitably lead to another, without sufficient evidence.

Texas Sharpshooter

Selects data to fit a preordained conclusion.

Post hoc

Assumes that because one event followed another, the first event caused the second.

Hasty Generalization

Draws a conclusion from a small or unrepresentative sample size.

Fallacies of Presumption

Fallacies that make unwarranted assumptions.

Begging the Question

Assumes the conclusion in the premises.

False Dilemma

Presents only two options when there may be other possibilities.

Selection Bias

Occurs when a sample is not representative of the population it is intended to represent.

Heuristic

Mental shortcut or rule of thumb used to make decisions or solve problems quickly.

Principle of Charity

Interpreting an argument in the most favorable light possible, assuming the arguer is rational and intends to offer a good argument.

Basic Components

Proposition

A statement that can be either true or false.

Non-proposition

A statement that is not a proposition.

Argument Mapping Terms/Concepts

Argument

A set of propositions, one of which is the conclusion, and the others are premises that provide support for the conclusion.

Non-argument

A list of statements that do not constitute an argument.

Premise

A proposition that offers support for the conclusion.

Conclusion

The proposition that the premises are intended to support.

Direct Support

Premises that directly support the conclusion without relying on other premises.

Indirect Support

Premises that support the conclusion by supporting other premises that directly support the conclusion.

Independent Support

Premises that offer separate and independent reasons to support the conclusion.

Conjoint Support

Premises that work together to support the conclusion.

Hidden Assumptions

Unstated propositions that must be true for the premises to support the conclusion.

Types of Arguments

Deductive Argument

An argument that aims to provide conclusive support for its conclusion; if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.

Inductive Argument

An argument that aims to provide probable support for its conclusion; if the premises are true, then the conclusion is likely to be true.

Valid/Invalid

A valid deductive argument is one in which the conclusion logically follows from the premises; an invalid deductive argument is one in which the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises.

Sound/Unsound

A sound deductive argument is a valid deductive argument with all true premises; an unsound deductive argument is a deductive argument that is either invalid or has at least one false premise.

Strong/Weak

A strong inductive argument is one in which the premises provide a high degree of probability for the conclusion; a weak inductive argument is one in which the premises provide a low degree of probability for the conclusion.

Cogent/Uncogent

A cogent inductive argument is a strong inductive argument with all true premises; an uncogent inductive argument is an inductive argument that is either weak or has at least one false premise.

Formal/Informal Fallacies

Informal Fallacy

An error in reasoning that is not a formal logical error.

Formal Fallacy

An error in reasoning that is a formal logical error, meaning that the conclusion does not follow logically from the premises, regardless of the truth or falsity of the premises.

Antecedent

The first part of a conditional statement, the part that comes before the "if".

Consequent

The second part of a conditional statement, the part that comes after the "if”.

Modus Ponens

A valid deductive argument that takes the form: If P then Q; P, therefore Q.

Modus Tollens

A valid deductive argument that takes the form: If P then Q; not Q, therefore not P.

Affirming the Consequent

An invalid deductive argument that takes the form: If P then Q; Q, therefore P.

Denying the Antecedent

An invalid deductive argument that takes the form: If P then Q; Not P, therefore not Q.

The Fallacy Fallacy

Committing a fallacy by assuming that an argument is wrong, simply because it contains a fallacy.

Informal Fallacies

Fallacies of Relevance

Arguments that rely on irrelevant premises to support their conclusions.

Ad Hominem

An argument that attacks the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself.

Genetic Fallacy

An argument that attempts to discredit a claim by appealing to its origin or history.

Straw Figure

An argument that misrepresents an opponent's position in order to make it easier to refute.

Red Herring

An argument that distracts attention from the main issue by introducing irrelevant information.

Appeal to Authority

An argument that relies on the authority of a source to support its conclusion, even when the source is not an expert on the topic.

Appeal to Force

An argument that uses threats or intimidation to get someone to accept a conclusion.

Appeal to Popularity

An argument that claims a statement is true because many people believe it.

Appeal to Consequences

An argument that argues that a statement is true or false based on its consequences.

Equivocation

An argument that uses a word or phrase in multiple senses, leading to a misleading conclusion.

Fallacies of Weak Induction

Arguments that rely on weak inductive reasoning to support their conclusions.

Appeal to Ignorance

An argument that assumes a statement must be true because it has not been proven false.

Slippery Slope

An argument that assumes that one event will inevitably lead to a chain of events, eventually culminating in a disastrous outcome.

Texas Sharpshooter

An argument that cherry-picks data to support a pre-existing conclusion.

Post Hoc

An argument that assumes that because one event occurred before another, then the first event caused the second event.

Hasty Generalization

An argument that draws a conclusion about a large group based on a small or unrepresentative sample.

Fallacies of Presumption

Arguments that make unwarranted assumptions about the truth of their premises.

Key Concepts From Section 2

Credibility of an Information Source

The degree to which a source can be believed to be accurate and unbiased.

Reliability of an Information Source

The degree to which a source consistently provides accurate and unbiased information.

Biases are systematic errors in reasoning that can lead to faulty conclusions.
There are many different types of biases, and it is often difficult to identify them in our own reasoning.
Being aware of the different types of biases can help us to be more critical of our own thinking and the thinking of others.

Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments

Deductive arguments focus on the relationship between premises and conclusion, where premises provide conclusive support for the conclusion.
Inductive arguments, on the other hand, offer stronger but not conclusive support.

Cognitive Bias

Cognitive bias refers to systematic errors in thinking that can influence judgment and decision-making.

Formal Fallacies

A formal fallacy is characterized by a flaw in the structure of an argument, rendering it invalid even if the premises are true.

Ad Hominem Fallacy

This fallacy involves attacking the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself.

Hidden Assumptions

A hidden assumption in argument mapping is an unstated premise that is crucial for the argument's validity.

Soundness of an Argument

A sound argument must be valid and have all true premises.

Ad Hominem

This is also known as a personal attack fallacy.

Anchoring Bias

This bias refers to the tendency to give excessive weight to the first information encountered.

Types of Fallacies

Ad Hominem: Attacks the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument's merit.
Appeal to Popularity: Asserts the truth of a claim based on its widespread acceptance.
Bandwagon: Argues that something is good or right because many people do it.
False Dilemma: Presents only two options when, in fact, more possibilities exist.
Hasty Generalization: Draws a broad conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.

Confirmation Bias

This bias involves seeking and interpreting information in a way that supports existing beliefs.

Complex Propositions

Complex propositions are statements formed by combining multiple simple propositions. They are distinct from simple propositions that convey a single idea.

Evaluating Source Credibility

To assess the credibility of an information source, consider the source's reputation, expertise, and potential biases.

Modus Ponens

This is a valid argument form that states: If P, then Q; P is true; therefore, Q is true.

Argument Types

Deductive Argument: Premises provide conclusive support for the conclusion.
Inductive Argument: Premises offer strong but not conclusive support for the conclusion.
Informal Argument: The structure and content of the argument are evaluated based on logical reasoning.
Formal Argument: The structure of the argument is evaluated for logical correctness.

Heuristic

A heuristic is a rule-of-thumb strategy used for problem-solving, often relying on shortcuts or intuitive judgments.

Premise vs. Conclusion

Premises are statements offered as reasons or evidence.
The conclusion is the main point being argued, supported by the premises.

Conclusion

In an argument, the conclusion is the main point being argued based on the premises.

Fallacy Descriptions

False Cause: Assumes that because two events occur together, one caused the other.
Red Herring: Diverts attention from the main issue by introducing a distracting or irrelevant topic.
Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.

Fallacies of Relevance

These fallacies involve using irrelevant arguments to distract from the main issue.

Inductive Arguments

Inductive arguments provide strong but not conclusive support for their conclusions, relying on observation and generalization.

Hidden Assumptions

Hidden assumptions are unstated premises essential for the argument's validity, potentially leading to logical fallacies if not acknowledged.

Deductive Argument

A deductive argument claims that if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.

Confirmation Bias

This bias involves selectively interpreting evidence to confirm existing beliefs, ignoring evidence that contradicts them.

Inductive Argument

Inductive arguments typically offer strong but not conclusive support for their conclusions, relying on observation and generalization.

Sound Argument

A sound argument cannot have false premises.

Red Herring

A red herring is a common informal fallacy that diverts attention from the main issue by introducing a distracting or irrelevant topic.

False Cause Fallacy

The fallacy of false cause involves assuming that because two events occur together, one causes the other.

Fallacy Descriptions

Ad Hominem: Attacks the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument's merit.
Appeal to Authority: Asserts the truth of a claim based solely on the authority of the person making it.
Appeal to Emotion: Manipulates emotions to persuade rather than providing rational arguments.
Begging the Question: Assumes the truth of the conclusion in the premises.
False Dilemma: Presents only two options when, in fact, more possibilities exist.
Hasty Generalization: Draws a broad conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.
Slippery Slope: Argues that one event will inevitably lead to a chain of undesirable consequences.

Principle of Charity

The principle of charity involves interpreting an argument in the most favorable and logical light, seeking the strongest and most reasonable interpretation of the author's claims.

Informal Fallacy

A fallacy of relevance is one type of informal fallacy, where the argument uses irrelevant information to distract from the main topic.

Propositions

A proposition is a statement that can be either true or false.

Argument Mapping

Argument mapping focuses on representing the structure of an argument, illustrating the relationships between premises and conclusions.

Logical Terms

Premise: A statement offered as a reason or evidence.
Conclusion: The main point being argued, supported by the premises.
Sound Argument: A valid argument with all true premises.
Valid Argument: An argument where the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
Informal Fallacy: A flaw in the reasoning of an argument, not due to a structural flaw, but due to a fault in the content or logic.
Formal Fallacy: A flaw in the structure of an argument, making it invalid, even if the premises are true.

Fallacy Matching

Ad Hominem: Attacks the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument's merit.
Appeal to Popularity: Asserts the truth of a claim based on its widespread acceptance.
Bandwagon: Argues that something is good or right because many people do it.
False Dilemma: Presents only two options when, in fact, more possibilities exist.
Hasty Generalization: Draws a broad conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence.
Red Herring: Diverts attention from the main issue by introducing a distracting or irrelevant topic.
Straw Man: Misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack.

Argument Types Matching

Deductive Argument: Premises provide conclusive support for the conclusion.
Inductive Argument: Premises offer strong but not conclusive support for the conclusion.
Informal Argument: The structure and content of the argument are evaluated based on logical reasoning.
Formal Argument: The structure of the argument is evaluated for logical correctness.

Bias Matching

Anchoring Bias: Giving undue weight to the first piece of information encountered.
Confirmation Bias: Favoring information that confirms existing beliefs.
Availability Bias: Overestimating the likelihood of events that are easily recalled.

Logical Reasoning Terms Matching

Deduction: Reasoning from general principles to specific conclusions.
Induction: Reasoning from specific observations to general conclusions.
Abduction: Reasoning from an observation to the most likely explanation.
Heuristic: A mental shortcut or rule-of-thumb strategy used for problem-solving.

Studying That Suits You

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

Description

Explore the fundamental concepts of propositions, arguments, and their classifications in logic. This quiz covers essential terms such as premises, conclusions, and different types of arguments like deductive and inductive. Test your understanding of these basic yet crucial concepts in logical reasoning.