{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

SIMON FRASER phil001 1077001week4#1part

SIMON FRASER phil001 1077001week4#1part - Dr Mcs Philosophy...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Dr Mc’s Philosophy 001 (1077) Part Notes, Week 4#1 © Assignment 3 is due ____________________ (Assignment 2 ______________) Cogent arguments whose patterns don’t _________ Feldman’s: This is not the argument: 1. 2. 3. I have not _______________________. What of? 1. . 2. 3. This would be ______ (as we’ll see) but it is not ____________________. 1. 2. We cannot _____________________________. The conclusion ____________ what is provided by the premises. If certain _____________________ are met, it can be a ___________________. 1. Every pizza I’ve had at that restaurant has been great. 2. The one I’m about to have will be great. What sorts of factors are relevant in this example? Cogent arguments are ____________________ Determining cogency solely on the ______________________. 1071001week4#1part 1
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Back to ____________________ for arguments intended to be _____. We are going to use the ________________________________ Types of sentences used. 1.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 4

SIMON FRASER phil001 1077001week4#1part - Dr Mcs Philosophy...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

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