PHI 1103 Exam 2 Vocabulary Study Guide

A complete set of vocabulary flashcards covering key concepts, logical operators, argument forms, biases, heuristics, and epistemology for the PHI 1103 Second Exam.

Argument

A set of statements in which one or more statements (premises) are offered as reasons or evidence to support a conclusion.

Premise

Statements that provide evidence or support for a conclusion.

Conclusion

The statement that the premises in an argument are intended to establish.

Proposition

The meaning or claim expressed by a declarative sentence that is either true or false and can serve as a premise or conclusion.

Dual Systems Theory

A model of the mind divided into two processing systems: System 1 and System 2.

System 1

The intuitive processor in Dual Systems Theory that processes information quickly and accepts conclusions that agree with existing beliefs.

System 2

The reasoning processor in Dual Systems Theory that is slow and deliberate.

Deductive Argument

An argument used to prove that the conclusion is definitely true, evaluated as either valid or invalid.

Inductive Argument

An argument used to prove that the conclusion is probably true, evaluated as weak or strong.

Valid Argument

An argument structured such that if all the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

Invalid Argument

An argument where the conclusion could still be false even if all the premises are true.

Sound Argument

A valid argument that contains all true premises.

Logical Possibility

Something that is possible because it does not involve a logical contradiction.

Physical Possibility

Something that can happen according to the laws of nature.

Psychological Possibility

Something that a person is mentally capable of thinking, imagining, or experiencing.

Physiological Possibility

Something that is physically possible given the capabilities and limitations of the human body.

Belief Bias

The tendency to judge an argument based on whether one believes its conclusion is true rather than evaluating the quality of its reasoning.

Motivated Reasoning

The process of evaluating arguments non-objectively to match existing beliefs, which can be minimized by considering opposing evidence.

Counterexample

An example that shows a claim or argument is false, which helps in the evaluation of deductive arguments.

Negation ($\sim P$)

A logical operator meaning "Not P".

Conjunction ($P \wedge Q$)

A logical operator meaning "P and Q".

Disjunction ($P \vee Q$)

A logical operator meaning "P or Q".

Conditional ($P \rightarrow Q$)

A logical operator meaning "if P, then Q".

Biconditional ($P \leftrightarrow Q$)

A logical operator meaning "P if and only if Q".

Modus Ponens

A valid deductive argument form.

Modus Tollens

A valid deductive argument form.

Affirming the Consequent

An invalid deductive argument form.

Denying the Antecedent

An invalid deductive argument form.

Sufficient Condition

A condition that is enough to guarantee that another condition will occur.

Necessary Condition

A condition that is required and must be present for another condition to occur.

Principle of Charity

The practice of interpreting another person's argument in its strongest, most reasonable form.

Enthymeme

An argument that has an unstated or missing premise or conclusion that is usually assumed to be understood by the audience.

Explanation

A statement that describes why or how something is true, clarifying a claim that is already accepted as true rather than proving it.

Statistical Syllogism

An inductive argument that uses statistical information about a group to make a conclusion about an individual member of that group.

Rule of Total Evidence

The principle that when making an inductive argument, one should consider all relevant evidence rather than solely evidence supporting the conclusion.

Fallacy of Exclusion

A fallacy that occurs when someone leaves out relevant evidence that would weaken their conclusion.

Defeater

Evidence that weakens the support an argument provides for a conclusion.

Rebutting Defeater

A defeater that provides evidence that the conclusion is false.

Undercutting Defeater

A defeater that attacks the connection between the premises and conclusion without proving that the conclusion is false.

Inductive Generalization

An inductive argument that uses information gathered from a sample to make a general conclusion about an entire population.

Representativeness Heuristic

Judging the probability of something based on how closely it resembles a typical example.

Availability Heuristic

Judging how likely something is based on how easily examples come to mind.

Argument from Analogy

An inductive argument that compares two or more things because they share certain similarities.

Inference to the Best Explanation

An inductive argument in which someone considers different possible explanations for evidence and concludes that the one that best accounts for it is probably correct.

Confirmation Bias

The tendency to accept evidence that supports existing beliefs while ignoring evidence that challenges them.

Disconfirmation Bias

The tendency to challenge evidence that disagrees with existing beliefs more critically than evidence that supports them.

Fallacy of Equivocation

A fallacy that occurs when someone uses a word or phrase with two different meanings in the same argument, creating misleading reasoning.

Confound

An additional variable that influences two variables and can make it appear that one causes the other when that may not be the case.

JTB Theory of Knowledge

The theory stating that knowledge consists of Justified, True, Belief (justified true belief).

A Priori Justification

Justification that does not depend on experience, arising instead from reasoning, logic, and understanding.

A Posteriori Justification

Justification that depends directly on experience.

Testimonial Evidence

Information or evidence received from other people through their statements.

Perceptual Evidence (David Hume)

Evidence derived from direct perception, which David Hume considered stronger than testimony because people can lie, exaggerate, or misunderstand.