PHIL 102 Arguments from Analogy
PHIL 102 Arguments from Analogy PHIL 102
Popular in Logic and Reasoning
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Kevin Thayyil on Sunday April 17, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PHIL 102 at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign taught by David R. Gilbert in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 17 views. For similar materials see Logic and Reasoning in PHIL-Philosophy at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Reviews for PHIL 102 Arguments from Analogy
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/17/16
Lecture 15 Arguments from Analogy Monday, March 28, 2016 10:05 AM Argument from Analogy A1, a2, a3… has property p1, p2, p3… and Q B has properties p1, p2, p3… Therefore,b [probably] has Q A1, a2, a3… are the primary analogates B is the secondary analogate P1, p2, p3… are similarities Q is the projected property Ex. Katherine has taken a lot of philosophy courses and liked all of them Phil 102 is a philosophy course Therefore,Katherine will like Phil 102 Primary - 3 Phil course she took Secondary - Phil 102 Similarity - Philosophy course Projectedproperty - Katherine will like it Two of my friends had carpets cleaned by Kleen Rite, and they did a good job for both. Therefore,Kleen Rite would do a good job on my carpet. Primary - The cleaning jobs done for my 2 friends Secondary - the cleaning job Kleen Rite would do for me Similarity - Done by Kleen Rite Projectedproperty - Good job Adding more primary analogates makes the argument stronger. Adding more similarities Relevance of similarities Adding dissimilarities makes the argument weaker. A dissimilarity is a difference between the primary and secondary analogates. They're called disanalogies  Diversityof primary analogates : Increasing the diversity makes the argument stronger, provided it doesn’t affect the similarities or dissimilarities Specificity of the argument: more specific conclusions Specificity of the argument: more specific conclusions weakens the argument. Making it less specific, thus more general, strengthens the argument. Caveat 1. Relevance of the similarities The above rules hold when we have no other information other than what is stated in the 2. Number of similarities 3. Nature and degree of disanalogy premises. Sometimes,additional informationwe 4. Number of primary analogues have might override rules. 5. Diversityamong the primary analogues 6. Specificity of the conclusion I Picked up a card from this deck and it was an ace My opponent picked up a card from this deck Therefore,my opponent card is an ace I picked up four cards from this deck and they were all aces. My opponent picked up a card from this deck Therefore,my opponents card is an ace The second argument should be stronger but from the background knowledge that a deck only has 4 aces, the second argument is weaker.
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'