IMG_0003_NEW_0007 - are rttr*ribS 2. Premises and Testimonv...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ewluating testimonial arguments. .. Any testimonial argument following any of the standard patterns is cogent, so evaluation willfocus on *4,o- +rwdt -l .Ob faro,rniSoz ^nO ,/**lun tt* ' except ror $l &"A,th6 must be done on --\--' O * nr,, IU cOry ls the argument /,{-"fuI^1""1 ? Do you have information that would call You might, if or if flAA)n"rilal When are two arguments _ A.f+;A Z - &a/1^ 4loir anr{r*st-ls ffi o6n+td, J Our book describes " in terms of the conclusions being r^,rtrao/ziWnrie< -, but the term also applies when they
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: are rttr*ribS 2. Premises and Testimonv often, appeals to testimony are implicit in rwt-wqprttia/ ^vntur?0s .-Consider this argument as given by me: 1 Port Moody is at the base of Eagle Mountain. 2- Most places near the base of a mountain are good places to live if one likes hiking. 3. Port Moody is a good place to live if one likes hiking. Do you think this is a good argument? ( *'FrJ) Often, we are not in the each of which seems truth values of premises. to 1 101001reek8#2part @...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 12/29/2011 for the course PHIL 1 taught by Professor Jillianmcdonald during the Fall '10 term at Simon Fraser.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online