Pytanie  |
Odpowiedź |
How do you object to a deductive argument? rozpocznij naukę
|
|
Demonstrate that either (1) the argument is invalid or (2) a premise is false. You want to convince us that the argument is unsound.
|
|
|
What should you never do when objecting to a deductive argument? rozpocznij naukę
|
|
Never argue that the conclusion is false. If the argument is valid and the premises are true, the conclusion must be true (by force of logical necessity).
|
|
|
What is the basic strategy for showing that a deductive argument is invalid? Provide the basic formula to start off a proof. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
Come up with a counterexample in which the premises are all true, but the conclusion is still false. Even if it is true that [PREMISE #1] and it is also true that [PREMISE #2], it could still be false that [CONCLUSION]. For instance,...
|
|
|
Object to the following argument: If someone has never had desires, then they have never been disappointed.Dr. Stenberg has never been disappointed. Therefore, Dr. Stenberg has never had desires. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
... For instance, it is possible that Dr. Stenberg has never been disappointed because, although he has desires, they are very minimal and have always been met. Perhaps he has only ever desired the basics of life and has always had those desires met. In that case, the premises would be true and the conclusion false. So the truth of the premises of this argument do not guarantee the truth of the conclusion. As a result, it is invalid.
|
|
|
What are the two importantly different kinds of premises? Give an example of each. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
Conditionals & everything else If reincarnation occurs, then I may have been a dog in a previous life. Pigs are as smart as dogs.
|
|
|
What is the basic strategy for showing that a conditional is false? Provide the basic formula to start off a proof. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
Show that, even if the antecedent were true, the consequent could still be false. Even if it were true that [ANTECEDENT], it could still be false that [CONSEQUENT]. After all,...
|
|
|
Object to the following premise: If it is cloudy, then it is raining. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
... After all, it could just be cloudy outside or it could be cloudy and snowy.
|
|
|
Object to the following premise: If you have broken the law, people shouldn't look up to you. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
... After all, many people have broken the law who are still worthy of great honor and respect. MLK Jr. broke the law by marching in Birmingham, but he is admired. You might break unjust laws for justice and people should look up to your courage.
|
|
|
What is the basic strategy for showing that a non-conditional is false? rozpocznij naukę
|
|
Give good reasons v good evidence for thinking that the premise isn't true. Depending on the premise in question, you might use a counterexample, thought experiment, scientific study, expert opinion, etc.
|
|
|
Object to the following premise: Human beings can't get enough protein in their diets without eating meat. rozpocznij naukę
|
|
It is just factually inaccurate that people can't get enough protein from non-animal sources. For example, peanut butter and tempeh contain more protein per gram than chicken or beef. And there are a wide range of plant-based protein options nowadays. "National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference," United States Department of Agriculture. Dan Lowe, "Common Arguments for the Moral Acceptability of Eating Meat: A Discussion for Students," _Between the Species_, Vol. 19, Issue 1 (2016): pp. 176-192.
|
|
|
