PHILOSOPHY EXAM 2

Argument

reasons that support a claim

Proposition

true or false/serves as a premise in an argument

Dual Systems Theory

system 1 causes certain beliefs, system 2 handles reasoning

Deductive Argument

proves that the conclusion is definitely true

Inductive Argument

proves that the conclusion is probably true

Valid Argument

if all premises are true, the conclusion must be true

Sound Argument

valid argument with all true premises

If an argument is valid, is the conclusion true?

no, a valid argument has a true conclusion only if the premises are actually true

If an argument has all true premises and a true conclusion, is it valid?

no, just because an argument has all true statements doesn’t mean the argument is valid

Logical Possibility

not limited by what’s possible in real life

Belief Bias

thinking the argument is valid because you believe the conclusion is true

Motivated Reasoning

evaluating evidence differently because you want the conclusion to be true

What can we do to minimize falling victim to motivated reasoning?

know what it is, know that everyone is at risk, recognize when you want a belief to be true

Counterexample

all of the premises of an argument are true and the conclusion is false

Sufficient Condition

a proposition whose truth is enough for the truth of the consequent

Necessary Condition

a proposition must be true if the antecedent is true

Principle of Charity

interpret a speaker or writer as trying to make sense, trying to say things that are true, and trying to offer a good argument

Enthymeme

an argument that leaves out an important premise

Difference Between Argument and Explanation

arguments are why you should believe something

explanations are how or why something happened

Statistical Syllogism

(P1) 75% of Ps are Qs

(P2) x is a P

(C) x is a Q

Factors That Determine Strength of Statistical Syllogism

1) the extent of overlap between reference and attribute class

2) the extent to which the argument is sensitive to evidence

Rule of Total Evidence

strength is determined by all relevant evidence

Fallacy of Exclusion

ignoring evidence that is relevant for determining whether the conclusion is true

Defeater

reasons to reject an argument

Rebutting Defeater

a reason to reject a conclusion

Undercutting Defeater

a reason to reject an argument

Inductive Generalization

uses a premise about a class of objects/events to support a conclusion about a larger class of objects/events

What is required for an inductive generalization to be strong?

1) sample is sufficiently large

2) sample is representative of the population

Representativeness Heuristic

deciding an object has a certain property because it is similar to other things that have that property

Availability Heuristic

judging something is common because you can easily think of instances of it

Argument from Analogy

2 things are similar in some ways, so we assume they are similar in another way too

What is required for an argument of analogy to be strong?

2 sets of objects in question must be sufficiently similar

Inference to the Best Explanation

an explanation is a reason to think that what it explains is true

What is required for an inference of the best explanation to be strong?

1) actually explains the data

2) more than a mere logical possibility

3) satisfies Ockham’s razor

Confirmation Bias

distorts our evaluation of information because we want to seek evidence that confirms existing beliefs

Disconfirmation Bias

tendency to avoid evidence that disconfirms your existing beliefs

Fallacy of Equivocation

using a term with different meanings in an argument to reach a conclusion

Confound

variable that defeats an inference from correlation to causation

How can we acquire knowledge of causation given that correlation is not causation and our knowledge of causation depends on knowledge of correlation?

we can infer causation from both correlation and the absence of confounds

JTB Theory of Knowledge

1) a belief

2) a true belief

3) a justified, true belief

A Priori

belief is justified on the basis of reason

A Posteriori

belief is justified, at least in part, by sense perception

Testimonial Evidence

1 or more propositions acquired from 1 or more persons

Why did David Hume think that perceptual evidence is always stronger than testimonial evidence?

direct experience is more reliable than reports from others who could be mistaken

What reason is there to think that Hume was wrong?

multiple witnesses, low probability of error

Inductive Generalization Example

(P) all of the women in GA reported they aren’t sexually active

(C) the women in GA aren’t sexually active

Argument from Analogy Example

(P1) sarah studied every day and got an A

(P2) emily studies every day also

(C) emily will probably get an A

Inference to the Best Explanation Example

you believe bad bunny performed at the super bowl

Fallacy of Equivocation Example

(P1) her drinking was in part responsible for her assault

(P2) if youre responsible, youre to blame

(C) shes to blame