Week 4 Journal
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
DePaul University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
577
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by BarristerValorGuineaPig18
1
Week 4 Journal
2
Week 4 Journal
Valid is defined in our textbook as “the assumption that all the premises are true makes it impossible for the conclusion to be false, that is, if the premises entail or imply that conclusion” (Facione 2015). Looking at the lexical definition I would define volatility as a sort of confirmation to deem an argument true or not. Warranted in our textbook is defined as “The premises supply enough support or justification for us to infer with confidence with the conclusion that is very probably true, but not necessarily true. (Facione 2015). Looking at the lexical definition of warranted I would define it as a confirmation that the argument is true. When applying these to arguments it is important that we evaluate the inferences presented in the
arguments to justify or support the conclusions. I will be choosing “denying the antecedent” fallacy which in simple terms follows this pattern. “Premise 1: If A, then B. Premise 2: Not A. Conclusion: Therefore, not B (Facione 2015). This fallacy considers all premises false if premises 1 is false. If premises 1 is false, the rest of the argument will also be false. An example of this denying the antecedent fallacy would be as followed: Premise 1: If it’s raining, I’ll need an umbrella. Premise 2: It is not raining. Conclusion: I do not need an umbrella. This example follows this fallacy pattern because without
rain we do not meet the requirements for premise 2 or “B” as Facione calls it in our textbook. As mentioned in the textbook it does not make logical sense for premise 2 to occur without premise 1 being true. In the example at the end of chapter 9 I think the exercise would be a good way to practice critical thinking skills and evaluating good and reliable sources however since this source sates back to 2009 most this information may be very outdates with today’s news. While this is a good
3
topic to explore and does have a lot of information and arguments to form a solid opinion on this topic it is past the 5-year mark used when evaluating sources credibility. This exercise would take quite some time evaluating all four tests for evaluating arguments. I think issues today could
easily be used to analyze including topics like decriminalizing abortion, legalization of marijuana, and LGBTQ+ rights. I believe everyone should have some knowledge on topics of current interest and issues even if it doesn’t personally affect them. As a human that meets and crosses all different people and paths throughout life being informed on current events and key information not only advances your critical thinking skills and gives you wisdom on these crucial
topics but allows you to effectively communicate and start conversations and arguments with those around you.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
References
Facione, P., & Gittens, C. A. (2015).
THINK Critically
(3rd Edition). Pearson Education (US).
https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9780133914351