lecture2

lecture2 - Philosophy 3: Critical Thinking Course website:

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–8. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
    Philosophy 3: Critical Thinking Course website: http://www.philosophy.ucsb.edu/websites/phil3/ Homework exercises, due Monday: Layman, ch. 1.1 A 2, 5, 10, 13, 15, 17, 20 B 2, 5, 6, 9, 12, 14, 15, 20, 24, 26, 29 C 1, 3, 5, 7, 11, 14, 15 D 3, 4, 6, 9, 14 1.4 B 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14 C 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 15, 17 D 1, 2, 5, 6, 9
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
    Recap This class is about methods for distinguishing good arguments from bad arguments An argument is a series of statements one of which (the conclusion ) is claimed to be supported by the others (the premises ) An argument is good when it is truth-preserving. An argument is truth-preserving when it won’t lead us from true premises to a false conclusion – if the premises are true, the conclusion will be too.
Background image of page 2
    Introducing Validity We left off talking about this argument: 1) To see the movie, I need to leave 30mins before the movie starts. 2) The movie starts at 7pm. So, 3) To see the movie, I need to leave at 6.30pm. We said it was a good argument because if the premises are true, the conclusion will be too.
Background image of page 3

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
    Introducing Validity In fact, something more is true. If the premises of this argument are true, the conclusion must be true. As we can also put it, the conclusion follows from the premises; the premises entail the conclusion. Arguments like this are valid .
Background image of page 4
    More Examples 1) All men are mortal 2) Socrates is a man So, 3) Socrates is mortal 1) Hillary will win the nomination only if Obama loses. 2) Obama will not lose So, 3) Hillary will not win the nomination In both examples, if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true too.
Background image of page 5

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
    The intuitive idea: an argument is valid when the conclusion follows from the premises. Note: ‘valid’ is used as a technical term. It can be applied to arguments but not to statements. By contrast, ‘true’ and ‘false’ can be applied to statements but not to arguments.
Background image of page 6
    A precise definition of validity An argument is valid if and only if it’s necessary that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true. In other words,
Background image of page 7

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 8
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/08/2008 for the course PHIL 3 taught by Professor Way during the Spring '08 term at UCSB.

Page1 / 26

lecture2 - Philosophy 3: Critical Thinking Course website:

This preview shows document pages 1 - 8. Sign up to view the full document.

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