Phil-100A-Hndt-5-F-10

Phil 100a hndt 5 f 10

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Phil 100A: Ethics F 10 Professor Aaron Zimmerman 1. Modeling Copperfield’s Inference The boy reasons as follows: (1) Creakle enjoyed causing the boys to suffer, singling out the chubby boys for special attention. Therefore, (2) Creakle acted in a mean and unfair way. Therefore, (3) Creakle acted immorally. Semantic Questions: Does (1) entail (2)? Does (2) entail (3)? (Mightn’t the inference be valid if not “formally” valid? What distinguishes “formally” valid inferences from informally valid ones?) Epistemic Questions: If (a) S knows (1); and (b) S directly infers (2) from (1); and (c) (2) is true; does S know (2)? Similarly, if S knows (2); and directly infers (3) from (2); and (3) is true, does S know (3)? (A further question: Are formally valid inferences any better than informally valid inferences for extending our...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 11/11/2010 for the course PHIL 100A taught by Professor Mcmahon during the Fall '09 term at UCSB.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online