PHIL 101 final

argument

Set of Statements(true or false) where one statement provides support for another

Steps for Evaluating Arguments

• Consider the context of the passage

• Distinguish the premises and the conclusion

• Do the premises adequately support the conclusion?

• Are the premises plausible/true?

modus ponens (valid)

if p then q

p

therefore q

modus tollens (valid)

if p then q

not q

therefore not p

affirming the consequent (invalid)

if p then q

q

therefore p

denying the antecedent (invalid) 

if p then q

not p

therefore not q

disjunctive syllogism (valid) 

p or q

not p

therefore q

hypothetical syllogism (valid) 

if p then q

if q then r

therefore if p then r

inductive argument

cultural relativism

What is morally right and wrong is relative to one’s culture. There are no

objective or universal moral truths that hold for all cultures

the cultural differences argument

1. Different cultures have different moral codes

2. There are no moral truths that all cultures have in common

3. Therefore, there are no objective or universal truths in morality

Ad hominem (appeal to the person) 

attacking the person behind the source rather than the argument

Ad populum (appeal to popularity) 

tries to get someone to go along with the crowd

equivocation 

using two different meanings of the same term in the same argument

false dilemma

reducing options to just two, overlooks alternatives

begging the question 

using the conclusion as a premise

overgeneralization/hasty generalization

making a conclusion based off of a few examples

straw person 

false cause

exaggerates a viewpoint

• People who don't support the proposed state minimum wage increase hate the poor

division 

assumes that what is true of a whole or group must also be true of its individual parts or members

composition 

assumes that what is true for individual parts must also be true for the whole

slippery slope 

arguing that a small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of extreme events