phil cards
CH1
Syntax – the grammatical rules of how to form symbols properly in a language; not primarily concerned with meaning but the arrangement of words in a sentence.
Semantics- the meaning of words and sentences. Refers to what is represented in a language; conveys ideas.
Functions of Language- understanding this is an essential skill to reading critically. Reportative, Evocative, Imperative, and Interrogative.
Reportative- functions reportatively whenever its intention is to describe or report a particular state of affair, or the way things are.
- Descriptive- to describe something about the state of affairs
- Evaluative- using words to make some kind of normative judgement
- Emotive- using words to express emotional or subjective feelings about something.
Interrogative- it is used to inquire about the way things are, or to ask for information. To find things out.
Imperative- it is used to direct someone to do something. Commands are the most common form.
Evocative- its primary intent is to evoke an image or elicit an emotion from the listeners. To evoke a feeling/ image.
CH2
Statement/ Proposition/ Claims- a sentence of language with a reportative function. A kind of sentence which will make you ask if the statement if true or false.
Argument- a set of statements of which one is designed the conclusion, and the rest are called premises.
Premise- the statement that supports the conclusion.
Conclusion- statement that is supported by the premises.
Standard Form- we list the conclusion of the argument preceded by the premises. P1, P2, C.
Premise indicator- words that come immediately before the premises in an argument. (since, because, given that, and, firstly, secondly, etc.)
Conclusion indicator- preceding a statement indicates that it is something which follows from the reason given. (therefore, hence, so, thus, etc.)
Simple Argument- most basic form. One premise supports conclusion.
Independent Premises- V-style, premises that support the conclusion independently of other premises in an argument. Does not logically need other premises to support conclusion. Independent reason.
Dependent Premises- premises that logically require each other in order to give a good reason for conclusion. T-style.
Indirect premise- only supports the conclusion indirectly via sub-conclusion.
Sub-conclusion- premise that it itself the conclusion of another premise or set of premises. Mini argument in the main argument.
CH3
Missing premise- an implicit part of an argument that the speaker has neglected to state explicitly. Serves to clarify an existing inference.
Argument noise- is a term for words, sentences, and phrases that are mixed in and around an argument that aren’t actually a part of the argument. Can be distracting; makes it hard to understand the main point of the argument.
Logical Strength- in the degree to which it would be unlike for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. Comparative property, it is in its highest degree if its premises, if true, make its conclusion more likely to be true.
Validity- structural property. Maximal logical strength. It would be impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
Soundness- if an argument is valid and each of its premises is in fact true. Guaranteed truth of conclusion.
Deductive Arguments- arguments which intend to demonstrate their conclusions with the certainty of full validity.
Inductive Arguments- arguments which intend to persuade us of the likelihood of their conclusions; they don’t give us certainty.
CH4
SL (Sentence Logic) - vocabulary for a “formal language.” Represents atomic statements with letters and natural logic operators with their formal equivalents, we can translate statements of natural language into SL.
Atomic statement- direct statements containing no logical operators. They cannot be broken down into pieces any smaller than themselves.
Compound statement- any statement which consists of one or more logical operators.
Sentence letters- uppercase letters used as an input variable of a truth function. Can be true of false.
Negation- (~) tilde, acts by reversing the truth-value of the statement. Is true when the statement being negated is false and vice-versa.
Conjunction- (&) ampersand, connecting words; the result is only true when both statements joined are true.
Disjunction- (V) wedge, the result is true most of the time, except when neither of the statements are true. “at least one of the statements is true”
Conditional- ( ) arrow, the result is true most of the time, except when the statement to its left is true and the statement to its right is false. “If...then”
Logical Operator – are words and expressions which, when used in combination with other statements, asserts something about the truth conditions of the statements to which they are applied. Taking input values and transforming them into output values.
Translation key- designates an upper-case letter to represent each atomic part of the statement.
CH5
Truth table- used to analyze the truth or falsity of a statement in every possible TVA.
Truth Value Assignment (TVA)- is a particular assignment of truth values to each atomic statement.
Classic Forms- to recognize whether an argument is valid of invalid without a truth table. Recognized at a glance.
Affirming the Antecedent- Valid Form. First premise is a conditional and the second premise corresponds to the antecedent.
Denying the Consequent- Valid form, first premise is a conditional and second premise corresponds to the negation of the consequent, conclusion is the negation of antecedent.
Hypothetical Syllogism- Valid form, 2 conditional premises and a conditional conclusion.
Valid Disjunctive Syllogism- Valid form, it doesn’t matter if the first of second disjunct is denied, the other disjunct may be affirmed.
Affirming the Consequent- Invalid form, first premise is a conditional and second premise corresponds to the consequent.
Denying the Antecedent- Invalid form, first premise is a conditional and second premise corresponds to the negation of the antecedent and the conclusion negates the consequent.
Invalid Disjunctive Syllogism- Invalid form, when we assume that disjunction is operating in the exclusive sense.
CH6
Categorical Statement- make a claim about the relationship between two categories or sets of objects.
Universal Affirmative- (A) All S are P
Universal Negative- (E) All S are not P
Particular Affirmative- (I) Some S are P
Particular Negative- (O) Some S are not P
Square of Opposition- relationships between categorical statements. A-O, I-E contradictories; A-E contraries; A-I, E-O subalterns; I-O subcontraries.
CH7
Categorical Syllogism- an argument with two premises and a conclusion, where every statement of the argument is a categorical statement.
Syllogism- 2 premise argument
Venn Diagram- used to determine whether certain kinds of arguments are valid or invalid.
CH8
Strong Statement- if statement is claiming something big. Stronger premise statements, more premises, weaker conclusion. True premises make the conclusion likely to be true.
Weak Statement- if statement is claiming something small. Weaker premise statements, less premises, strong conclusion. True premises does not make conclusion likely to be true, only slightly.
CH9
Probability- is a numerical measure of the likelihood of an event. 0 represents likelihood of an impossible event, 1 is the likelihood of a certain event. At 50% an event is equally likely to happen as it is not to happen.
Equiprobable- events are those which are equally likely to happen.
Conditional Probability- considering the probability of a particular events given that certain information is known. If we know some particular thing to be the case, then it may have an effect on the possible outcomes, and thus the probability of the event that we’re interested in.
Gambler’s Fallacy- occurs when in a series of repeated actions, a particular event fails to happen an unexpectedly high number of times; the fallacy is then supposed that because the event has failed to happen do often, that it must, therefore, be more likely to happen in the future.
Conjunction Fallacy- conjunctions are stronger statements than the conjuncts taken separately, and stronger statements, since they make bigger claims than their weaker counterparts, are less likely to be true.
50-50 Fallacy- mistakenly thinking that something is more likely to occur in the future, if it has already occurred less often than expected. Results from a failure to take into account new information when estimating probabilities.
CH10
Poll- observations of a sample and may form the basis of a generalizing inference.
Sample- is the portion of the population being directly observed.
Population- the group to which we are generalizing based in these observations. Sometimes called “target group.”
Margin of error- measure to describe the accuracy of a poll. It is like a target, describing how close the relevant property in the population is likely to be to the observation made of the relevant property in the sample group.
Confidence level- describes how likely it is that the poll hits the target that the relevant property in the population is within the MoE of the polling result. Depends on the stated MoE.
CH11 Fallacies
Begging the Question- using a premise which assumes/relies on the truth of the conclusion. The premise if just another way of saying the same thing as the conclusion.
“The Leafs are the best hockey team in the NHL, because they are better than any other team.”
Equivocation- an inference that relies on a repeated word, but the sense or meaning of the word is different in different instances. The word is being used figuratively in one instance, and literally on another.
“Noise children are a real headache. Two aspirin will make a headache go away. Therefore, two aspirin will make noisy children go away.”
False Dichotomy- has the form of a valid disjunctive syllogism; the problem, however, is that the disjunction is false. Fails to account for third or fourth possibilities besides the ones in the disjunction.
“Either you’ll go to the concert with me, or you’ll have a boring time at home alone! Since you won’t go with me, I guess you’ll just be bored.”
Ad Hominem- makes irrelevant claims about the person’s character, attacking them. Calls the person’s credibility into question, rather than engaging the person’s actual argument.
“Why should we listen to you, since you are dishonest?”
Tu Quoque- Accuses a person of being guilty of the same fault they are pointing out in another person. You yourself are guilty of the same fault.
“You tell me that I shouldn’t use plastic grocery bags because of its environmental impact, but you drive a gas-guzzling SUC! Why should I listen to you?”
Slippery Slope- asserting without evidence that once thing will lead to something much more extreme.
“Legalizing marijuana today will lead to children buying heroin from the corner store tomorrow!”
Strawman- unfairly representing an opponent’s argument as something much weaker than it actually is, or misattributing views to opponents that they don’t actually hold.
“Those who support gun control want to leave us defenseless against criminals.”
Post Hoc- erroneously inferring that just because something follows another thing, it must therefore have been caused by it.
“I wore my lucky socks today, and I aces my midterm! My socks must have really helped.”
Confusing Cause and Effect- erroneously inferring that one thing is the cause of another, when in fact it’s the other way around.
“Have you ever noticed that, often, when it snows, it’s also cold? That’s because snow makes it cold!”
Common Cause- inferring that one thing causes another, when in fact there may be some third factor which is the cause of them both.
Red Herring- blanket term for an irrelevant premise, especially one designed to distract from the central issue.
Appeal to (Inappropriate) Authority- asserting that something is true simply because some authority figure has said so.
“Proportional representation must be a superior electoral system, since Davod Suzuki supports it.”
Appeals to Ignorance- asserting that an explanation must be true, just because there is no known alternative, or asserting that there is no possible explanation, just because there is no known explanation.
“What causes a clownfish to change its sex? Who knows? Your guess is as good as mine. There must not be any answer.”
Appeals to Anecdotal Evidence- asserting that something is true in general because of a limited number of observation/ hearsay stories.
“My neighbor’s friend once got a flu shot, and then he has hiccups for a month. So, I’m never going to get a flu shot.”
Appeal to popularity- involves accepting something is true solely on the grounds that it is believed by a large number of people.
Appeal to pity- involves making someone wish a conclusion were true because they feel sorry for someone or something.
Appeal to force- involves threatening someone into accepting a conclusion.
Principle of Charity- invites us to seek, as far as possible to interpret others’ arguments in their strongest possible light. The idea that it is important to represent the arguments of others in their strongest possible form.
CH12
Rhetoric- sometimes thought of as the art of persuasion. To include all of the things that go into making an argument persuasive, besides the actual reasons given. Has to do with the way the argument is presented.
Confidence- asserting something in a confident tone or manner it more likely to be believed is true.
False confidence- irrational technique of persuasion that involves trying to convince someone that a conclusion should be accepted just because it is asserted with confidence.
Humour- used to make an argument seem more compelling. If someone makes us laugh, we are more likely to accept what they tell us without close examination because we feel sympathetic towards them.
Repetition- saying things over and over that has a rhetorical effect. The more often we hear a thing, the more likely we are not only to remember what we hear, but also to believe it.
Loaded term- an irrational technique of persuasion that involves disguising an evaluative claim in the form of a descriptive claim. To get someone to see something in a specific light without disclosing that one is actually making an ethical judgement.
Loaded questions – is an irrational technique of a persuasion that involves posing a question that disguises an implicit claim.
Misleading statistics- involves taking advantage of the ways in which people struggle with numeracy.
CH13
Biases- bundle of predispositions, stemming from our own particular experiences, enculturation, and basic psychological makeup. They make us more likely to view some things favourable than others, and more likely to be persuaded to accept certain conclusions than others.
Confirmation bias- is tendency we always have to accept evidence which supports what we already believe far more readily than evidence that challenges our beliefs. This may lead to accepting arguments that support our preexisting commitments too hastily.
Attribute error- specifically describes the way in which we evaluate the actions of others based on whether the person is someone we consider a friend or an enemy. Bias that causes us to view those whom we perceive to be a part of our group more favourably than those we perceive outside.
Implicit bias- because of the unconscious nature of these biases, and the often-subtle ways they affect our thinking and actions, contrary to our explicit beliefs and values.
Credibility excess/ deficit- refer to imbalances in the level of trust and attention given to an individual’s testimony or claims. Occurs when someone is not given the appropriate level of credibility due to boas pr prejudice.