notes_6_2x2 - Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 1 '...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

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

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

Unformatted text preview: Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 1 ' & $ % Overview of Todays Lecture Todays Music: Van Morrison HW #2 due tomorrow @ 5pm in the 12A Drop Box (outside 301 Moses). + Make sure to follow the guidelines/hints on my HW Tips Handout. I will go over some of that stuff right now. The mid-term is next Thursday, 6/10 (in class) . Ive posted a sample mid-term same structure as actual mid-term, with problems of similar complexity. I will discuss it today (at end). + NOTE: The mid-term exam will only cover Chapter 3 topics. I have posted HW #3, which is due next Thursday @ 4pm in drop box. Its all chapter 3 problems truth-table methods for validity-testing. I have posted a handout on the short method for testing LSL validity. I will go over this important handout in todays lecture. Today: Chapter 3, Continued UCB Philosophy Chapter 3 (Contd) 06/04/08 Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 2 ' & The Exhaustive Truth-Table Method for Testing Validity Remember, an argument is valid if it is impossible for its premises to be true while its conclusion is false. Let p 1 ,...,p n be the premises of a LSL argument, and let q be the conclusion of the argument. Then, we have: p 1 . . . p n q is valid if and only if there is no row in the simultaneous truth-table of p 1 ,...,p n , and q which looks like the following: atoms premises conclusion p 1 p n q > > > We will use simultaneous truth-tables to prove validities and invalidities. For example, consider the following valid argument: UCB Philosophy Chapter 3 (Contd) 06/04/08 Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 3 ' & $ % A A B B atoms premises conclusion A B A A B B > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + VALID there is no row in which A and A B are both > , but B is . In general, well use the following procedure for evaluating arguments: 1. Translate and symbolize the the argument (if given in English). 2. Write out the symbolized argument (as above). 3. Draw a simultaneous truth-table for the symbolized argument, outlining the columns representing the premises and conclusion. 4. Is there a row of the table in which all premises are > but the conclusion is ? If so, the argument is invalid; if not, its valid. We will practice this on examples. But, first, a short-cut method. UCB Philosophy Chapter 3 (Contd) 06/04/08 Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 4 ' & The Short Truth Table Method for Validity Testing I Consider the following LSL argument: A (B & E) D (A F) E D B This argument has 3 premises and contains 5 atomic sentences....
View Full Document

Page1 / 8

notes_6_2x2 - Branden Fitelson Philosophy 12A Notes 1 '...

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