Intro to Logic Hw 1
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Rutgers University, Newark *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
730:201:90
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by CommodoreStarBeaver28
Exercise 3 (For Credit)
(a) Determine whether each of the two arguments is sound
or unsound respectively.
[03.1] 1. George Washington is one of the Founding Fathers.
2. George Washington crossed the Delaware.
3. Therefore, George Washington is the first President.
[03.2] 1. Man is immortal.
2. Socrates is a man.
3. Therefore, Socrates is immortal.
Answer for (a): The first argument about george washington is unsound and the second argument about socrates is sound
(b) Explain your answers by referring to the two
constituent properties of soundness.
Answer for (b):
For the first argument (3.1), is unsound because although both premises
are true, the two premises do not support the conclusion making the argument invalid so it does not meet one of the criterias for it to be sound.
For the second argument(3.2), the argument is sound because it does meet the two constituent properties of soundness. Both the premises are true and together they support the conclusions. Even though the first premise may not be true, the argument is
still sound because the premises still support the conclusion and make the inference true.
Exercise 4 (For credit)
(a) Determine whether the argument given below is
deductive or inductive
[04.1] Amoco, Exxon, and Texaco are all listed on the New
York Stock Exchange. All major oil companies must
be listed on the NYSE.
[04.2] Anyone who is good at logic is a critical thinker.
I am good at logic. So I am a critical thinker.
Answer for (a):
For the first argument (4.1), the argument is inductive For the second argument (4.2), the argument is deductive
(b) Justify your answer by referring to the employed
criteria on inference.
Answer for (b):
For the first argument about the oil companies, it is inductive because the direction of inference goes from a particular statement to a generalized statement which is the opposite of a deductive argument. Although the conclusion is not 100% certain based on the premise, the premise is still true and supports the probability of the
conclusion based on the observation of the premise so the inference is also strong. It is strong because all the companies listed are big major oil companies so there is a good chance that all major oil companies are listed on the NYSE
The second argument is deductive because the conclusion is 100% certain to be true based on the premise. The direction of inference begins with a general statement about anyone being a critical thinker for being good at logic to a particular conclusion about a specific person being a critical thinker. The conclusion is in the premise so we would not
have to go outside the bounds of the premise which gives us the certainty that it true.
Exercise 8 (For Credit)
Answer the two conceptual questions as elaborately as you
can.
[08.1] What does it mean to say that a rational
argumentation in a civilized society takes place in
an "interactive" environment?
[08.2] When does an argument become fallacious in a way
that it "begs the question"?
Answer for (8.1): To say that a rational argumentation in a civilized society takes place in an “interactive” environment means that it is regarded from the perspective of two or more individuals. When there is an argument, there are two different ideas from two individuals and they are trying to persuade their views. This process of engaging in rational argumentation involves active participation as well as exchange of ideas from individuals. It requires people to interact with one another whether it is speaking or listening or even working together, thus making it an “interactive” environment
Answer for (8.2): An argument becomes fallacious in a way that it “begs the question” when one comes to a conclusion that is based on a premise that does not really support
the conclusion. It can either be independent from the conclusion or the conclusion can be restated in the premise. When someone is attempting to prove something and they just assume whatever it is that they are trying to prove, the argument then becomes fallacious. For example, if someone were to argue “ Evolution is true because it is a fact” this argument would be considered a fallacy because although valid, that person just assumed that it is true. Anyone can deny or assume the exact opposite of this argument. It would be begging the question because it is arbitrary.
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