phil001notesweek8.1 - Dr Mcs Philosophy 001 (1084) Lecture...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1084001notesweek8 © 1 Dr Mc’s Philosophy 001 (1084) Lecture Notes, Week 8 © Assignment #4 due this week; #5 in two weeks. Next week is a holiday! A bit more on conditionals: If P, then Q. We have been understanding them as stating that ?: 1. P is necessary for Q. 2. Q is necessary for P. 3. P is sufficient for Q. 4. Q is sufficient for P. Sometimes, we do not intend conditionals to be taken this way: If it is Tuesday evening at 6:30 this term, then Dr Mc is at 001. In this case, the antecedent provides some grounds for thinking the consequent true, but its truth is not sufficient. We might better reconstruct this as saying: Most Tuesday evenings at 6:30 this term, Dr Mc is at 001. Unlike the book, I do not think it is a good idea to change conditionals into generalisations whenever possible. Our valid sentential logic patterns can be very useful for some arguments containing conditionals. However, if a conditional is more reasonable to accept if it is re-worded as a less- than-universal generalisation, do so You may make it a universal generalisation if it is reasonable accept and this would help to make the argument well-formed. -keep in mind the principles of charity, faithfulness, etc.! Understanding the meanings of sentences We’ve talked about ambiguity I need new glasses. Su-Feh watched Andrew dance with intensity. Fred and Alicia own the same car. Teachers make more than neuroscientists. Some more problems of meaning: Vagueness Some concepts are vague. e.g., tall, rich, bald…
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
1084001notesweek8 © 2 The Sorites Paradox Sometimes, the truth value of a sentence containing a vague term is not clear. Compare: Stephen Harper is bald. Jason Alexander is bald. Patrick Stewart is bald. With vague terms, there are borderline cases. Some think that this causes a problem for OTV, in that there should be three truth values. T, F, and Indeterminate. We will not pursue this (we’ll stick with OTV!), but we should be prepared to suspend judgement in borderline cases. However, there are also clear (non-borderline) cases. Wrong or Misleading words
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.

This note was uploaded on 04/09/2011 for the course PHIL 1 taught by Professor Jillianmcdonald during the Winter '10 term at Simon Fraser.

Page1 / 6

phil001notesweek8.1 - Dr Mcs Philosophy 001 (1084) Lecture...

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

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