Notes from Philosophy 100.12 (2012-13)
What follows are the generally unedited
and uncorrected student notes of the class. It may provide a
guide for what was covered in class. Caveat lector.
September 12, 2012 Marty
Cashen
Please read the Apology page 423 in your Plato
book, we could start going over this next week.
Logic is the study of reason and argument,
rational persuasion of a person.
An argument is any conversation were you are
trying to persuade someone to believe your conclusion by using
premises.
Premises are reasons to support your
conclusion; they are used to help you persuade someone your
conclusion.
A discourse can be defined as a connected
series of statements.
When reading a connected series of statements
(discourse), to be an argument you do not want to EXPLAIN things,
you still need to persuade the person.
Not all discourses are argument, but sometimes
the argument could be hidden in a story.
When engaged in an argument or reading one, you
need to look and see is this person trying to convince me of
something. Are they trying to persuade me enough to believe their
conclusion?
To help you determine an argument, look for
indicator words. Indicator words are works that lead you up to
something. There are two types of indicator words premises and
conclusion words.
Premises indicators are letting you know that a
reason is coming up. Examples of premises words are because,
since, moreover, furthermore, etc.
Conclusion indicators are letting you know that
a conclusion is coming up. Examples of conclusion words would be,
so, hence, therefore, thus, consequently,
etc.
Sometimes they give you false reason, meaning
they give you indicator words but it still isn’t an argument.
EX- I punched John because he insulted my
mother.
This is not an argument even though it has a
premises indicator (because). This statement is not trying to
persuade you of anything, it’s just a fact.
There are two ways to help you determine an
argument.
1) Is the purpose of the
discourse trying to persuade me?
2) The usage of indicator
words.
Good arguments have to be reasonable to accept,
you can use three distinct terms to help you.
1) Is the argument logically
strong?
2) Is the argument valid?
3) Is the argument sound?
Logically sound means any argument were the
premises gives you some good reason to believe the conclusion.
A valid argument is if the premises are TRUE,
then the conclusion must be TRUE.
An example of a valid argument would be.
Antigonish is in NS
NS is in Canada
Antigonish is in Canada.
We will learn about sound arguments in the next
class.
THERE WILL BE A QUIZ ON FRIDAY FOR THE FIRST 10
MINUTES OF CLASS.
Aaron Doucette / [to come?]
Friday 21st of September (David Feehan)
Statement Form.
1. Simple Statement-
one simple statement
• The Cat is on the mat
2. Negation- One
Statement
• Its not true that the cat is on
the mat
3. Conjunction-joins
two simple statements, both statements must be true if the
statement is true
• the cat is on the mat and its
purring
4. Disjunction
Inclusive- One of the statements can be true but both can be as
well
• Either the cat is on the mat, or
its on the table
5. Disjunction
Exclusive- Only one can be correct and the other must be wrong.
The truth of one, excludes the other.
6. Conditional or
Hypothetical- “Don’t worry about that now”
• If the cat is on the mat, then
let sleeping cats lie.
Necessary Truth and Contradiction (Necessarily
False)
• If “P” then “P” ( as long as P is
the same thing) then it must be true
• Two Negations can cancel each
other out
If I’m Will Sweet then I’m Will Sweet. -True
If it is false that i am not Will Sweet then i
am Will Sweet-True
Either i am Will Sweet or I’m not Will
Sweet-True
I am Will Sweet- False
All unmarried women are spinsters- True
All swans are white- False
Mon Sept 24 (Libby
Hughes)
Necessary Truth and Contradiction
A contradiction is necessary false
Necessary truth is absolutely true
Necessarily true structure:
If “P” then “P”
If not not “P” then “P”
Either “P” or not “P”
Contingent – something happens to be true, most
sentences are contingent.
A statement can be not necessarily true, if it
is true for one person and not for another. Example - my name is
Libby. This is true for me but not for others.
The structure of a statement doesn’t always
indicate that it is necessarily true or false. It is about the
content of the statement and what the words mean – analysis.
Statements can be analytically true or true by definition, looking
at the content. If you know the concepts of the content is true,
then it is true by definition.
A statement is a necessary truth if the truth
can be known on purely logical grounds.
Structure/form = tautology (must be true)
Example
God is all powerful
This is necessarily false as there is no
possible way that it can be true
Consistency and Inconsistency
Example
All human beings have rights vs Some human
beings do not have rights -
This is inconsistent
Consistency - it is possible that both
sentences are true at the same time.
There is a possible situation in which all
statements are true
If sentences do not contradict each other then
they are consistent.
Example
Consistent -
She is wearing blue
She is wearing red
Inconsistent –
She is wearing only blue
She is wearing red
September 26, 2012 (Christopher Keeping)
Introduction
We took the majority of the class to review the
material that we covered in the last couple of weeks, below are my
interpretations about the material covered in class.
Material
Formal Logic – This deals with the structure of
an argument’s conclusion and its premises. It can be in
other language systems for example 1 + 1 = 2 would use formal
logic with the 2 being the conclusion and 1 + 1 being its
premises.
Informal Logic – Informal logic looks at the
content of the statement to deduce if it is true, this could use
definitions of a language such as English.
Note: Definition can change depending on how
the word is used and what time frame and place the definition is
being used for, in other words definitions can have multiple
meanings, so be careful.
Arguments - is a series of statement that can
have multiple premises and only one conclusion. It is always
trying to persuade someone of something. The conclusion can be
stated multiple times, but it is still the same conclusion.
Discourse - is a connected series of
statements. Arguments are discourses, but not all discourse
is arguments.
Indicator words - help indicate if a argument
is present. However, they don’t always point to an argument since
other sentences like explanations can use them.
Below is a short list of premise indicator
rules:
Furthermore
Because
For
Since
Below is a short list of conclusion indicator
rules:
Therefore
As a result
Hence
Should have
Logically Strong Argument – is any argument
where the premises give good reasons to believe the
conclusion. The premises should be relevant to the
conclusion and it should be easy to understand. The content
should also be probable enough that it can be true.
Valid Argument – is a logically strong argument
where if the premises are true than the conclusion must be true.
Sound Argument – is a valid argument where the
premises are indeed true and therefore the conclusion must be
true.
Five Different Types of Statement Forms
Simple form – the cat is on the mat.
Conjunction – The cat is on the mat and asleep.
Disjunction – The cat is either on the mat or
on the floor.
Conditional – If the cat is on the matt then
let sleeping cats lie.
Necessary truth – is a statement that is not a
contradiction, and that the statement is always true. For
example: At some point, living creatures will die. You can
determine if it is a necessary truth through its structure, which
is called tautology, or though the content and its intended
meaning, called analytic.
Consistency – an argument is consistent if the
statements have the possibilities to be true at the same time,
otherwise it would be inconsistent.
Dictionary – is a document outlaying the way
that people use words, it is important to note that the a word can
have different meaning depending on how the word is used in a
sentence, the time period the word is being used in, and the
region.
There are different ways to prove an
argument. Three ways to prove one are:
Deductive Arguments
-Sentence Structure
Inductive Arguments
-Sampling (ex: Surveys)
-Generalization
-Analogy
-Mill’s Method
Indirect
-Reduction ad absurdum(Will be explained later)
Sept 28 / Alex Issa [ to come?]
Oct 1 / Natalie Lesco
Proofs/ Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
Went over examples from p.27 (Deductive #6,8 -
Inductive #9)
-Opinions can be proven
Deductive Arguments
-deduction is a type of validity
Modus ponens (affirming the antecedent)
IF= antecedent THEN= consequent
If A then
B
A
Therefore, B
in other words...
One premise hypothetical/conditional
2nd premise confirm antecedent
Therefore, necessarily the consequent
-validity is not about the truth of the
statement, but how the premises prove the conclusion (it is about
the truth of the structure)
Modus tollens (denying the consequent)
If A then B
Not-B
Therefore, not-A
Conditional chain
If A then B
If B then C
Therefore, if A then C
-if the premise is true, the conclusion must
follow
-logic won’t tell you if premises are true
Necessarily follows-> deductive
Probably follows-> inductive
Inductive Arguments
Hint: when an assumption has to be made (ex.
assuming that the past will decide the future)- most likely an
inductive argument
Generalization/Sampling ... always
question/evaluate sources-what is the size of the sample?-what is
the spread?-is the sample random?
Oct 3 / Morag MacDonald
Generalization
In an inductive argument, which depends on
enumeration, we draw a conclusion about all the members of a class
from premises, which refer to some observed members of that class.
Sometimes called sampling.
Ex: All apples in the sample are Grade A.
Therefore, all apples in the barrel are Grade A.
-When the spread is bigger, your conclusion is
more likely to be stronger.
-When the spread is narrowed, for example, by a
certain day of the week (Friday) or certain group of people
(Catholics), it makes the spread smaller and the conclusion is
weaker because of the randomness.
Ex: The six Fromagians were all Catholics and
we saw them on Friday.
-When you take a small sample out of a large
area, then your conclusion is weaker.
Ex: Instead, we concluded that most Frenchmen
ate cheese with white wine.
The word, most, makes your conclusion mildly
weaker because it is a vague word.
Analogy
In an inductive argument that uses analogy, we
draw a conclusion about some thing, based on relevant similarities
that that thing has to another.
Ex. Rats and humans are similar on the basis of
their phycology.
Analogy is based on similarities.
Ask yourself:
Are their similarities relevant?
Are their any dissimilarity’s?
Does it persuade you?
Example: Explorers vs. Students
-Explorers don’t have to take tests.
-Students working conditions are less
dangerous.
-Explorers are adventurous.
-Explorers have more experience, survival
skills and tend to travel in groups with a leader.
-Explorers are typically older people.
The more relevant similarities, the stronger
the argument and conclusion will be.
The more dissimilarities, the weaker the
argument and conclusion will be.
Oct 5 /
Oct 8 / Stephen MacFarlane
Oct 10 / Ian MacFarlane
Apology occurs in Athens, Ancient Greece
Trojan War
- Story of how Prince Paris was promised by the
Gods the most beautiful woman in the world, Helen of Troy.
- King Agamemnon was the husband of Helen
of Troy and king of the Troy
- Occurred around 1240 BCE
Record of the Trojan War was recorded by Homer
in his Iliad in 800 BCE and covered a wide range of topics
- Love
- Anger and Wrath
- Honour and Cowardice
- Morality
- The Gods and how they interacted with and
actively manipulated humans
Why? (Would the Gods do this?)
- Issue of free will. Did Prince Paris have
free will when he took Helen of Troy, or was he being manipulated?
Morality vs Gods
- Philosophy starts as a means of discovering
'truths', explanations for why.
Pre-Socratic Philosophy (600 BCE)
- People are no longer simply accepting
traditions. Now people are seeking reasons and answers to
understand the nature of reality and wisdom
- Pythagoras - Mathematics and Mathematical
Philosophy. Used math to study and understand the nature of
reality
- Hippocrates - The Father of Modern
Medicine. The source of the Hippocratic Oath, central to modern
medicine
- Muses - Origin of the word 'music',
inspiration for arts and source of knowledge
- PhD - Origin of the title 'Doctor'
Sophists - 'wise guys'
- Knowledge vs thinking you know, largely
focussed upon image
- Acted as teachers and advisors, instructing
others as to how to argue
- Opinions of Sophists varied greatly. Sophists
were either very appreciated or loathed (popular or unpopular),
depending upon the person asked
- Questions of logic, ethics and about 'us'
Is Socrates a Sophist?
- Who is Socrates?
- What are the charges against Socrates (in the
Apology)?
- What special insight or wisdom does Socrates
claim to have?
Oct 12 / Ceilidh Marshall
-Last class we talked about how Greece wasn't
as small as it is today, it was made up of surrounding places as
well.
-Reading a text: What is the purpose?
Different purposes for different
texts/audiences ie text books are to share common or basic
information while a novel or creative work is usually to share
authors sentiments, get others engaged etc. For public consumption
A philosophical text isn't just a story. Need
to ask why Plato wrote this text. To relay historical info?
Something more? Plato loves/respects Socrates so he's favourable
to him
Understanding the context is part of knowing
the purpose
-Roots of greek philosophy: Poetic/mythic texts
-Iliad 800 BC
Following what the Gods say
Beginning around 600 there was an effort to
find naturalistic causes ie why? why is it made of?
One of the earliest: cosmological. Became
questions of science
Want to find out why
Rational/analytical explanations
-Socrates
Who was he?:
70 yr old philosopher
Likes to talk ie questions/problems
Married, has kids
Served time as a solider
"Teacher", but doesn't call himself one.
Doesn't charge fees
Charged with not believing in the Gods and
corrupting the youth
He challenges authority
Accused of being a sophist
-Sophists:
Take weak arguments and make them stronger
Make things that aren't true sound plausible
Misrepresent reality
Socrates accusers at the trial aren't the only
ones, there are some that go way back who told stories to
the present population when they were younger. Educated from an
early age that Socrates was a problem
The first part of the apology is where Socrates
identifies the accusations and lists a series of explanations
instead of arguments
The oracle says no one is wiser than Socrates.
He denies that and tries to find someone who is in fact wiser, so
he can show that the oracle is wrong. He talks to the "wisest"
people, the ones recognized as experts. Socrates questions poets
(religious texts, traditions, culture), lawyers/politicians
(justice) etc. When he asks them questions, instead of getting
answers, he embarrasses them. Their reputation seems to make them
wise, but he finds out they actually don't really know what
they're talking about. In this way, he shows that the so called
experts know nothing and annoys the public by undermining
authority.
Oct 15 /
Nov.5th, 2012 . Nicole
Webb
Justice is…(class answers)
1) Abiding by the rule of the
law and following it in the punishment of criminals.
2) Fair punishment.
3) Fairness and equality
4) No biases, individuals
have the right to defend their positions even if they are harmful
to others.
5) What is the morally
correct/right thing to do.
6) The pursuit of fairness,
both in and outside of the formal legal system.
7) A penalty that is fair.
8) What happens after a
trial, when peace has been set and what a person gets what they
deserve.
9) Obeying a law or
principle.
10) Treating alike
cases alike.
11) When a person gets
what they deserve.
Different Patterns…
a) Everybody gets an equal
share. E.g. elementary/secondary education.
b) Each according to his or
her need. E.g. welfare
c) Each according to his or
her effort. E.g. grades.
d) Each according to personal
merit (virtue) E.g. promotions.
e) Each according to his or
her right. E.g. inheritance.
f) Each according to whether
society wants it (market) E.g. wealthy professions (doctors)
The Republic “need to knows”
What is it about?
What are the characters?
What are their beliefs?
What is justice? Why does it matter?
What are we suppose to take from the story?
Why is it important? Why should we believe it?
Questions in the Republica.
Why should I be just?
-Consequences now or in the future.
-Physical harm.
-Harm or reputation.
Does Socrates give us a reasonable answer to
any of these questions?
Nov. 7 - Chinakwu Odenigbo
First definition of Justice (Cephalos):
• Speaking the truth and
paying whatever debts one has incurred.
This raises the question: “what is a good
definition?”
• A good definition has to be
distinctive and essential
Polemarchos defines justice as:
• To give what is owed to
each; i.e “gives benefits and harms enemies”
Socrates replies this by giving a whole series
of analogies with medicine, warfare, agriculture………
Definition of a table:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/table