phl discussion - TYPE OF ARGUMENTS -DEDUCTIVE -universal...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
TYPE OF ARGUMENTS - DEDUCTIVE -universal ideas to particular clams -it has to be valid and sound to be a good deductive argument. -a valid deductive argument: if the premises is true, the conclustions has to be true (given the premises, if the argument is valid, that conclusion has to follow) ex1. All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is a mortal ex2. If it rains tomorrow, the streets will be wet. It rains tomorrow. The streets will be wet. ex of invalid argument: if it rains tomm, the streets will be wet. it doesnt rain tomm. the streets will not be wet -> NOT TRUE invalid: if it rains tomm, the streets will be wet. the streets will be wet. it rains tomm ==fallacy of (jumping to conclusions?) valid deductive argument: pigs fly,the giants will win the superbowl. pigs fly, therefore the giants will win the superbowl. - INDUCTIVE -generate conclusions from various particular claims) -how to evaluate it: Strength (one that has numerous and diverse observations) ETHICAL RELATIVISM -cultural, society (conventionalism)
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/09/2008 for the course PHL 304 taught by Professor Leon during the Spring '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Page1 / 2

phl discussion - TYPE OF ARGUMENTS -DEDUCTIVE -universal...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online