Philosophy 100 lecture 1

Introduction to Philosophy

Course Overview

• Focus: This course serves as an introduction to philosophical tools and methods that enhance critical thinking skills. Students are encouraged to delve deeply into various philosophical concepts, fostering a comprehensive understanding of the field.

• Emphasis: The course places significant attention on the precise use of language and structural clarity in both written and oral philosophical discourse. This attention to detail aims to facilitate better comprehension and articulation of complex ideas.

Course Materials

• Textbook Requirement: A thorough understanding of the course content relies on the 7th Canadian edition textbook, which is preferred. Students may opt for an e-version, provided it is the correct edition.

• Importance of Materials: It is crucial for students to acquire the required materials early to enable ample practice and self-testing, thereby reinforcing their understanding of the topics discussed throughout the course.

Course Structure

• Practical Approach: The course adopts a hands-on approach, expecting students to engage in various writing exercises that apply critical thinking theories to different philosophical contexts.

• Topics Covered:

  • Logic and Epistemology: Fundamental concepts related to the theory of knowledge and its implications.

  • Argument Analysis: Students will explore various issues, which include scientific, moral, and legal arguments, facilitating a well-rounded understanding of philosophical inquiry.

• Assessment: While there is no major paper required for the course, writing skills are emphasized through consistent practice and guidance on philosophical writing.

Learning Outcomes

• Argument Construction: Students will develop effective skills in constructing and critically evaluating both informal and formal arguments, enhancing their persuasive abilities.

• Logical Fallacies Awareness: A critical aspect of the course involves recognizing logical fallacies and incorrect reasoning patterns that can undermine valid arguments.

• Characteristics of Good Arguments: An understanding of what constitutes a good argument, including its properties and the structure will be developed over the duration of the course.

Background of the Instructor

• Instructor Experience: The instructor has been teaching at EMU since the year 2000, bringing a wealth of knowledge from esteemed institutions such as the University of Victoria and the University of Oviedo.

• Philosophical Interests: The instructor has core interests in ethics, metaphysics, and philosophy of mind, contributing to the depth of discussions in these areas throughout the course.

Key Philosophical Concepts

• Philosophy Definition: Philosophy is defined as the "Love of wisdom," which embodies the pursuit of knowledge that guides individuals to live meaningful and informed lives.

• Knowledge Components:

  • Justified True Belief: Understanding that knowledge is characterized by a justified belief that is true, supported by adequate reasoning.

• Importance of Reasoning: The connection between empirical methods and logical reasoning is vital for philosophical inquiry.

Principles and Laws of Logic

• Basic Laws of Logic: Several fundamental laws are introduced in the course:

  • Law of Identity: Asserts that an object is identical to itself.

  • Law of Non-Contradiction: States that contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.

  • Law of Excluded Middle: Declares that every statement is either true or false.

The Role of Inference Indicators

• Inference Indicators: Students will learn about inference indicators that aid in identifying premises and conclusions within various arguments. Understanding their role is essential for accurately structuring arguments.

• Examples:

  • Premise Indicators: Common indicators such as "because" and "since" signal the beginning of premises.

  • Conclusion Indicators: Phrases like "therefore" and "thus" indicate conclusions drawn from premises.

Arguments vs. Non-Arguments

• Arguments: Defined as a set of claims where premises support a conclusion to establish logical validity.

• Non-Statements: The distinction is made between arguments and non-statements, including questions, commands, or exclamations that do not carry truth value.

Course Expectations

• Engagement: Students are highly encouraged to actively engage with course materials and analyze passages for underlying arguments.

• Understanding Reasoning: Coherence in connections between ideas is essential for logical reasoning, and students will be guided in understanding these connections.

• Discussions: There will be active participation in discussions about the reasoning and basis behind varied statements and claims, fostering a collaborative learning environment.

Homework and Assessments

• Self-Testing: Homework will include engaging in self-testing and completing exercises from the prescribed textbook, promoting continual learning.

• In-Class Assessments: While there are no formal exams, in-class assessments will focus on evaluating students' understanding of argument structure and reasoning skills.

• Academic Integrity: A strong emphasis is placed on academic integrity, guiding students to complete all assignments honestly without resorting to premature access of answers before engaging with the material independently.

Final Notes

• Philosophical Challenge: Engaging with philosophy challenges students to think critically and clearly articulate their own thoughts and ideas.

• Essential Skills: Active participation, careful reading, and logical reasoning are deemed crucial for success within this course, preparing students for further pursuits in philosophy and related fields.

Review of Chapter 1 Content

The chapter contains dense material with extensive terminology that is crucial for understanding the overarching concepts of the subject. A glossary is provided at the end of the chapter for reference, helping students familiarize themselves with key terms and phrases. It is crucial to read the chapter before class to facilitate better understanding and participation in discussions. Completing soft tests without checking answers can significantly enhance retention by encouraging students to engage critically with the material and self-assess their understanding. Additional exercises, including case studies and real-world examples, will be provided to challenge comprehension and application of concepts in practical scenarios.

Argument Quality

The primary goal is to construct sound, well-reasoned arguments which are characterized by:

• Supportive Premises: Arguments must be built on premises that strongly support the conclusion drawn; this requires careful selection and analysis of evidence.

• Truthfulness of Premises: The premises need to be either true or likely true to ensure that the argument holds value.Arguments can be categorized into inductive (leading to probable conclusions based on evidence) or deductive (leading to certain conclusions based on established premises).

Key Concepts Include:

• Valid Arguments: Deductive arguments where the conclusion logically follows from the premises, regardless of the truth of the premises themselves.

• Invalid Arguments: Deductive arguments where the structure may appear valid, but the premises are false or misleading.

• Inductive Arguments: These are assessed as strong (also called cogent) or weak, depending on the extent to which the evidence supports the conclusion reached.

Soundness of Arguments

Determining the soundness of an argument involves two critical components:

• Validity: This refers to the logical connection between premises and the conclusion, ensuring that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

• Truth of Premises: Each premise must be factually accurate or likely to be true.

Example Structure:

• For Deductive Arguments: If all premises are true, the conclusion must logically follow to be valid.

• For Inductive Arguments: If premises are true, the conclusion is likely to be true with various degrees of probability depending on the strength of the evidence.

Distinction Between Arguments and Explanations

An argument aims to persuade the reader that a particular claim is true, necessitating logical support — the ability to provide evidence and reasoning. In contrast, an explanation merely describes or accounts for a fact that is already accepted as true without attempting to persuade the reader of its validity.

Important Distinctions Include:

• Intent to Persuade (Argument) vs. Intent to Explain (Explanation): An argument seeks to convince, while an explanation seeks to clarify.

• Examples can illustrate a point but may lack the depth and logical structure required for a robust argument.

Class Activities and Assignments

Engage actively with various exercises that include identifying premises and conclusions in assigned passages, encouraging critical thinking. Understand that evaluating the logical strength of arguments entails assessing the connection between premised statements and conclusions drawn from them. For practice, students are encouraged to assess given passages to determine whether they consist of arguments or merely explanations, and to justify their reasoning.

Homework and Next Steps

To prepare effectively, it is essential to review the handouts on arguments and non-arguments provided during class. Contributions from class discussions significantly shape individual understanding and analysis of arguments presented throughout the course. Future chapters will delve deeper into evaluating and developing strong arguments, enhancing students' skills in logical reasoning and critical thinking.

Sally's Arrival

• Anticipation builds among friends and family about Sally's visit on Friday; her absence has been notable, and many express their enthusiasm at the prospect of reconnecting with her. Her relationship with others emphasizes the social importance of being present and engaged in a community.

Discussion of Arguments

• There is an ongoing discussion about the structure and purpose of arguments in various contexts such as academia, debate, and everyday discussions.

• Emphasis is placed on the necessity of connecting points logically and coherently to substantiate conclusions drawn from those arguments.

• Understanding how to formulate strong arguments can enhance persuasive communication skills.

Philosophical Argument

• The complexity of philosophical arguments is introduced, noting that they often encompass multiple layers of reasoning and can include what is known as the Wodmaker's fallacy, which highlights errors in reasoning due to misleading language or inappropriate assumptions.

• This fallacy serves as a way to examine how certain expressions can create confusion or lead to incorrect conclusions in philosophical discourse.

Analysis of Arguments

Identifying Arguments

• The importance of recognizing whether a statement is an actual argument is emphasized. Identifying the presence of a conclusion and premises determines if what is being assessed truly reflects an argument.

• This identification process connects to the overall understanding of argumentation and its implications in various discussions.

Cosmological Argument

• Discussion regarding the cosmological argument focuses on existential questions and the implications of existence itself, establishing a framework that connects to natural arguments surrounding existence.

• This argument raises deeper philosophical questions about the cause and nature of the universe, while also addressing humanity's quest for meaning.

Rephrasing Statements

• The challenge of defining terms clearly for logical understanding is highlighted, as ambiguity can lead to misinterpretation and flawed reasoning.

Premises and Conclusions

Example of a Double Negative

• The complexity of language is illustrated with the usage of double negatives; for example, the word "Otherwise" can lead to confusion, necessitating a rephrasing to improve clarity.

Basic Structure:

• Premise 1: Something has always existed.

• Premise 2: If that weren't the case, nothing would exist now.

• Conclusion: It is clear that a void has never existed, implying a continuous existence that must be recognized in any philosophical or scientific inquiry.

Understanding Fallacies

Trickiness of Arguments

• Some philosophical arguments can be misleading due to the intricate nature of language and the multiple meanings words may hold, making it essential to analyze language carefully.

Modus Tollens

• The structure “If A, then B; not B, therefore not A” is introduced as a formal way to analyze arguments critically, emphasizing the importance of logical reasoning in forming valid conclusions.

Evaluating Logical Strength

Headache Relief Example

• Various people's experiences with over-the-counter medication for headache relief illustrate inductive reasoning; these patterns and experiences suggest that the argument around such medications is likely sound and grounded in empirical evidence.

• This relies on understanding general patterns from specific observations, which can lead to broader conclusions about efficacy.

Surgery vs. Physiotherapy

• Evaluating a doctor’s suggestion for treatment showcases how a patient's interpretation of communication regarding surgery choices can lead to sound yet potentially non-definitive conclusions about their care process, highlighting the need for clearer communication in healthcare settings.

Language and Meaning in Arguments

Meaning in Language

• Language serves as a conventional tool for communication but is fraught with complexity; nuances in meaning can significantly alter the interpretation of statements.

Philosophical Perspective

• The intersection of language and meaning invites philosophical inquiry into how we derive understanding from symbols and words.

Critical Thinking

• It is crucial to recognize the difference between mental states and physical states in the analysis of arguments, along with the acknowledgment that context plays a key role in understanding meaning.

Functions of Language in Communication

Evaluative vs. Descriptive

• Understanding how language functions in arguments is essential, focusing on its various roles such as persuasive, descriptive, and evaluative.

Examples of Functions in Sentences:

• Persuasive Language: Used to influence opinions or behaviors, often seen in advertisements or political speeches.

• Descriptive Language: Provides objective information about a subject without bias.

• Evaluative Language: Assesses conditions or ideas based on criteria of truth and can indicate personal judgments.

Exercises and Practical Tasks

Debate on Arguments

• Engaging in exercises designed to evaluate whether a statement qualifies as an argument by established definitions can sharpen critical thinking skills.

Identifying Context

• Understanding how context shapes the meaning and validity of arguments across various scenarios is key for effective analysis in discussions.

Definitions and Clarity

Critical Definitions

• The analysis emphasizes the significance of clear definitions to enhance the understanding of arguments.

Methods of Definition:

• Genus and Species: This method categorizes ideas broadly and specifically to prevent ambiguity in discussions.

• Ostensive Definitions: Terms can be defined through tangible examples that illustrate their meaning.

• Operational Definitions: These definitions are based on the function or use of a term in practical contexts.

Conclusion

Language Complexity

• Acknowledging that language is a fundamental component that shapes understanding and perception in argumentative processes.

Understanding Arguments and Nonarguments

• Argument vs. Nonargument

  • Arguments have premises that support a conclusion.

  • Nonarguments include explanations and assertions without premises.

• Types of Arguments

  • Strong vs. Weak Arguments: Strong arguments have robust support for their conclusions, while weak arguments lack solid backing.

  • Valid vs. Invalid Arguments: A valid argument has a conclusion that logically follows from its premises, while an invalid argument does not.

  • Cogent vs. Uncogent Arguments: Cogent arguments are strong with true premises; uncogent arguments are weak or have false premises.

  • Sound vs. Unsound Arguments: Sound arguments are valid with true premises; unsound arguments are either invalid or have at least one false premise.

Distinguishing Key Concepts

• Premises: Statements that provide support or evidence in an argument.

• Conclusion: The statement that the argument is trying to support.

• Implicit Premises: Unstated premises that are inferred from the argument context.

Examples of Arguments

• Example 1: "He must be home; his car is in the driveway."

  • Premise: His car is in the driveway.

  • Conclusion: Therefore, he must be home.

• Example 2: "If Christmas is on a Friday, the day after Christmas is a Saturday."

  • Interpretation: This could be seen as a valid argument if structured correctly, affirming a conditional.

Common Misunderstandings

• Arguments can be misclassified as explanations, which don’t aim to persuade but to clarify a fact.

• An explanation provides insight into something accepted as true, while an argument questions or asserts a conclusion based on evidence.

Additional Notes on Class Discussion

• Evaluating Claims: It’s crucial to identify whether a statement is trying to persuade or simply state a fact.

• Conditionals and Premises: Statements like "If A, then B" can serve as arguments if they follow the logical structure required for argumentation.

• Illustrations: These provide examples or analogies but do not serve as arguments.

Conclusion of Class Review

• Repeated practice in identifying arguments will enhance understanding and confidence in logical reasoning.

• Future chapters will delve deeper into logical structures and articulations of sound arguments.

Physiological Maladaptation and Cultural Adaptation

• Physiological maladaptation: Individuals who do not biologically adapt well to their environment may experience challenges in survival and reproduction but do not necessarily die off. This phenomenon allows them to pass on their genes to subsequent generations, despite not being ideally suited to their surroundings. This can result in traits that may be less advantageous in a changing environment becoming part of the gene pool.

• Cultural adaptation: Humanity's progression relies significantly on cultural adaptations that supplement biological evolution. These adaptations are especially facilitated by medical interventions, such as vaccinations and drug therapies, which enhance public health and allow people to thrive despite potential genetic vulnerabilities. Cultural practices, including healthcare access and education, play vital roles in shaping health outcomes and societal success.

Eugenics

• Definition: Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of a human population by influencing reproductive practices. This often involves coercive measures such as sterilization, particularly targeting those deemed 'unfit,' based on arbitrary criteria that can include race, disability, and socioeconomic status.

• Historical context: The eugenics movement gained traction in the early 20th century, peaking around World War II when its principles were adopted by various political ideologies, both on the left and the right. This period saw state-sponsored programs of involuntary sterilization primarily in Western countries, justified under the guise of public health and social improvement.

• Noteworthy operations: Historical examples include the involuntary sterilization of marginalized groups, such as Aboriginal women in North America and individuals with disabilities across many countries. These actions reflect deep-rooted systemic biases and have had lasting impacts on these communities.

• Gender considerations: A significant aspect of the eugenics movement was its disproportionate impact on women, as they often faced the majority of sterilization practices. This highlights a critical examination of gender power dynamics, where societal control over women's reproductive choices was prevalent.

Cultural Influences on Evolution

• Human evolution is heavily influenced by cultural norms and values, particularly regarding marriage practices and societal acceptance. These cultural practices dictate mating patterns, significantly impacting gene pools over generations.

• Exogamy vs. Endogamy: Exogamy, or marrying outside one’s social group, versus endogamy, marrying within a specific group, showcases how culture influences genetic diversity. Historical examples, such as royal families engaging in close-kin marriages, have been tied to increased rates of genetic defects due to limited genetic mixing.

• Social perceptions: Individuals with perceived defects or differences often face societal pressures that can inhibit the formation of romantic relationships, demonstrating how social stigmas influence breeding and genetic diversity.

Technology and Identity Formation

• The rise of social networks has transformed the way individuals form and explore their identities, free from the traditional constraints of geographical communities. These platforms allow for greater self-expression and connection among like-minded individuals.

• Positive impacts: Online communities can provide essential support and validation for marginalized groups, such as LGBTQ+ individuals, contributing to decreased rates of mental health crises and suicides by fostering inclusive environments.

• Negative impacts: Conversely, the anonymity of the internet can foster disinhibition, leading to toxic behaviors ranging from trolling to racist and sexist attacks. This phenomenon poses significant challenges to online discourse and the well-being of individuals targeted by these negative behaviors.

Early Childhood Socialization

• The significance of early interactions cannot be overstated; early experiences of neglect or deprivation can profoundly affect later social functioning and psychological health. Developing secure attachments during childhood is crucial for emotional and social development.

• Intergenerational trauma: Evidence suggests that chronic mental health issues, such as anxiety and depression, can often be traced back to negative early childhood experiences, including parental neglect. This intergenerational cycle of trauma can perpetuate disadvantage across family lines.

Social Networks and Inequalities

• Research indicates biased expectations from educators towards students from marginalized backgrounds, which can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies that drastically limit student potential and success. This bias reinforces existing inequalities in educational outcomes and social mobility.

• Cultural factors: The social structures and cultural narratives that surround race, gender, and socioeconomic status can either reinforce or mitigate existing inequalities, highlighting the need for systemic change to foster equity within education and societal opportunities.

Internet Silos and Information Control

• The emergence of online echo chambers or silos leads to the segmentation of information streams, reinforcing pre-existing beliefs. Individuals confined within these silos may become increasingly resistant to new ideas or perspectives, deepening ideological divides.

• Concerns of misinformation: The proliferation of fake accounts, often referred to as 'sock puppets', distorts realities online and manipulates public perceptions, complicating the truth surrounding significant global events and issues.

• Political indoctrination: Carefully selected messaging can cultivate divisions and intolerance among different ideological groups, making it increasingly challenging to engage in constructive dialogue across political lines.

Socialization in a Canadian Context

• The process of socialization occupies a significant role in defining identity within Canadian cultural norms, influencing individuals' perspectives on a wide array of social issues, including federal politics and community relations.

• Challenges faced by First Nations: Indigenous peoples in Canada continue to confront numerous challenges, including ongoing issues of rights, representation, and cultural acknowledgment. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for developing meaningful policies and fostering reconciliation efforts.

Conclusion and Call to Action

• Engaging in the political process is crucial for the empowerment of young individuals, encouraging active participation in democracy. This participation emphasizes the importance of personal agency in shaping societal values and driving necessary change within communities.

• It is essential for educational institutions to instill a sense of civic responsibility among students, promoting awareness of their rights and the impact of their voices in shaping public policy.

1^st Class 

• Rhetoric and reasoning 

• Epistemology – theory of knowledge 

• Will not have to write a paper 

• Another word for power is faculty 

• Reasoning = ratio (Latin) = logos (Greek) 

• Philosophy = love of wisdom 

• The study of truths, pursuit of knowledge, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.  

• No false beliefs 

• Beliefs that are most likely true rather than false 

• Knowledge possesses justified true beliefs 

• Empirical evidence is sense-based evidence 

• Causality 

• Principle of causality A relates/causes B 

• Grammar is logical and possesses a structure 

• We pursue truth because we want knowledge 

• We need reasoning to get sound knowledge 

• The word critical comes from the Greek word analytical 

• Requires critical thinking 

• There are preset rules of rational thought 

• Three basic laws of logic something cannot exist and not exist at the same time, something cannot sort of exist, something either is or isn't, law of middle excluded, for example cannot be sort of alive,  

• The active and systematic process of analyzing, evaluating, and formulating beliefs or statements in occurrence with certain rational standards. 

• A belief is a claim, a claim is a statement, a statement is a proposition 

• Every claim possesses truth value, either true or false 

• What is a statement, a propositional claim that can be either true or false 

• Black and white answers not always possible 

•  not always easy just read Immanuel Kant or read martin Heidegger or anyone of these 

• When asking a question, it is not a statement unless it is a rhetorical question 

• Questions, exclamations, commands, and advice/suggestions are typically not statements because they do not express something that is true or false.  

• Critical reasoning requires actively linking thought together in such a way that one thought provides support or reason for the truth of another thought. 

• Tradition = tradere meaning brought to you 

• Conscious reasoning is the active process of making inferences 

• Critical reasoning is coherent and logical 

• An argument is a set of statements where at least one of those statements (the premise) provides support for another statement (the conclusion) 

• Inference indicators, therefore, because, thus, so, consequently, since, for, given, as, follows from, hence, accordingly... 

• For a statement to be a proposition, claim, belief, or statement than it must be a declarative sentence.  

• Arguments require a series of claims consisting of reasons (premises) that aim to establish a belief, position, or judgement (conclusion). 

• Standard form is when an argument is separated into its basic components.  

• Informal logic, hard-to-place arguments into certain formulas 

• Principle of charity -  

• Principle of loyalty – write everything as it was by your opponent 

#1 

Premise 

You promised your parents that you would go home this weekend 

Conclusion  

You should go home this weekend 

#11  

Premise  

My purse with money and valuable items was stolen,  

Premise 2 

there is no sign of forced entry  

Premise 3 

and the door was locked while I was out. 

Premise 4 

Someone on the hotel staff is a thief 

Conclusion  

One or more people that make up the staff of the hotel are thieves.  

#5  

Premise 

Car skidded on ice and struck a van in an intersection 

Conclusion 

Car was written off and van suffered 3000 in damages. 

#6 

Premise 

No great leaders have ever suffered from low self esteem 

Conclusion 

To be great a leader must not suffer from low self esteem 

2^nd Class 

• Sound argument, premise and statement most likely true, strong connection between the two, everything must be most likely true rather than not 

• Either inductive or deductive arguments 

• Deductive arguments, have valid and invalid, the validity doesn't depend on the truth of the premises, but a sound argument must have a valid argument with two premises,  

• Inductive arguments have strong and weak, strong arguments are cogent (cogent argument has true premises),  

• First before we can assess an argument, we must determine its precise meaning (chapter 2-4) 

• Second, we need to assess the truth or falsity of statements that are part of an argument (chapter 6) 

• In an argument the speaker's purpose is to persuade you that something is the case 

• Vincere = to win  

• We request argument when, we do not yet accept a claim (conclusion) and are still looking for a rational basis (that a claim is true) 

• Illustrations are not arguments one instead requires evidence 

• The strength of an argument is independent of the truth or falsity of its premises 

• An argument has logical strength when it’s premises, if true, actually provide support for its conclusion 

• Always assume the premises are true  

• A deductive argument is one in which the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion  

• If their premises are true, it’s impossible for their conclusion to be false: the conclusion must necessarily be true as well 

• An inductive argument is one in which the truth of the premises makes it reasonable to hold that the conclusion is true 

• A good inductive argument establishes that, if the premises are true, then the conclusion is highly likely to be true 

• An inductive argument cannot be 100 % 

• Arguments cannot be past tense 

• Mental state not identical with a physical state 

• Brain state and mental state do not correlate 

• The reference of meaning, the idea theory of meaning, Meaning as a use 

• Meaning as use is the idea that words don't have meaning until they are perceived in the full context of the sentence that they are in 

• Descriptive function, evaluative function, emotive function, evocative function, persuasive function, interrogative function, directive function, performative function, recreational function 

• Sense of a term (connotation or intension) and its reference 9denotation or extension) 

• Reportive definitions are the standard use (as used in a dictionary) they remain the same. 

• Stipulative definitions mean that they are used without regard for its standard use 

• Essentialist definitions are when the meaning of the word tries to describe the real nature of what is being defined (justice, truth, freedom, love, peace, health, science ...) 

• Methods of definition, genus species method, ostensive method, synonym method, operational method, contextual method 

• To broad of a definition (soccer is a game played with a ball), too narrow (a farm is a place where crops are grown), too broad and too narrow (a pen is an instrument designed for writing words), circular definition (a surgeon is a person who performs surgeries) 

• Obscure definition (a marathon is a long foot race) 

3^rd Class 

• Cogent vs Un-cogent and sound vs unsound 

• An argument has the intent to persuade 

• An argument is not past tense 

• I at because I was hungry is not an argument (their just stating something, nothing to persuade, and is in past tense) 

• He must be home. His car’s in the driveway (premise, his car is in the driveway, conclusion, he must be home) is an argument. (trying to persuade) (you could add an implicit premise (premise 1; if his car is in the driveway then he must be home, premise 2: his car is in the driveway, conclusion: Therefore, he must be home) this is a deductive argument 

• Feelings don't matter 

• If Christmas is on a Friday, the day after Christmas must be a Saturday (this is a conditional statement, if – then) So it is simply a statement 

• Dinosaurs became extinct sixty-five million years ago, probably as a result of dramatic global cooling that resulted from the impact of a large asteroid. (it is in the past and so is simply an explanation) 

• Dogs make better pets than cats because they’re more intelligent and obedient. (always write in full sentences and replace unknowns with a proper noun (instead of they’re say dogs)  

• Majestic is a valuating statement (it cannot be proven) 

• Principle of charity: we have the moral obligation to treat our opponents fairly 

• When the speaker is not present than we have an obligation to adopt the most charitable explanation of their words 

• When two interpretations are possible we must always adopt the more reasonable one 

• We must remain as faithful as possible to our opponent's argument (the principle of loyalty 

• Ambiguity is the possibility of finding more than one possibility in a sentence 

• A vague sentence is one that lacks precise meaning 

• An ambiguous sentence is one that has precise meaning but the meaning can go in more than one possible way (has multiple interpretations) 

• Ambiguity can be referential or grammatical 

• Referential can refer to two or more properties of things (Pavarotti was a big opera singer) 

• Referential can be distributive or collective (our university has a large wrestling team) 

• Grammatical ambiguity arises when the grammatical structure of a sentence allows two interpretations, each of which gives rise to a different meaning. 

• Use vs mention. ( the failure to distinguish between using and mentioning a word or phrase). Tom said I was angry vs Tom said, “I was angry” 

• Referential is something unclear (sentence means more than one thing) whereas grammatical is direct grammar (word can mean more than one thing) 

• Necessary condition (A must be true for B to be true and if A is a false then B is false as well) 

• Sufficient condition (If A is there then B must be there however B can exist without A) 

Add