PHIL102, week 1, introduction to deductive and inductive inferences
PHIL102, week 1, introduction to deductive and inductive inferences Phil 102
Popular in Logic and Reasoing
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Angelica Li on Saturday April 23, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Phil 102 at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign taught by Timothy G McCarthy in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 7 views. For similar materials see Logic and Reasoing in PHIL-Philosophy at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Reviews for PHIL102, week 1, introduction to deductive and inductive inferences
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: 04/23/16
Introduction to Deductive and Inductive Inferences Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:28 AM Inference Argument Explain key concept Acceptable - premise makes the conclusion probable Deductive - premise guarantees conclusion Whole word problems(like hw) Inductive - iff 1 not deductive 2 probable Recognizing arguments Indicator words: signal the joint btw the premises and conclusion. e.g. therefore, hence, so, thus; since, because Incomplete arguments - Not acceptable - Missing unstated premises - Frequently generalizations Universal and statistical generalization Universal form: Every A is a B e.g. copper conducts electricity Statistical form: x% of As are Bs Example: A republican's not voting for a socialist candidate.-----> false premise ------> unacceptable Types of inductive argument - Statistical syllogism - Form e.g. x% of all As are Bs s is an A s is a B (50<x<100) - Argument based on Sample e.g. x% of observed As are Bs x% of As are Bs - Anomalies (deviation from the norm) ○ Sample size ○ Sample bias (variation) - Analogical arguments e.g. A and B are similar. A has property Q. B has property Q. Types of deductive argument - Sentential logic ○ Depend on connections btw sentences e.g. it's snowing or raining ○ Formal Sentential Validity A or B Not A B - Categorical logic ○ Depend on connections btw categories or kinds of things e.g. every platypus is a mammal some p lay eggs some mammal lay eggs ○ Formal Categorical Validity Every A is a B Some A has C Some B has C - Quantificational logic ○ Depend on the structure of relationships btw things e.g. not everyone likes Trump there's someone who doesn't ○ Formal quantificational Validity Not every A is Some A isn't Formal Validity - an argument is formally valid if it is an instance of a form that has only deductive instances Informal validity- deductive but not formally valid Phil 102 Page 1 Informal validity- deductive but not formally valid e.g. John is a bachelor John is not married Sentential Logic: Conditionals Conditional: A sentence that can be written in the form [ If A(antecedent), then C(consequent) ] Unless: P unless Q = If not P, then Q not A unless C = If A, then C Valid Conditional Forms If A, then C (affirming antecedent) - A--->C If A, then C (Denying consequent) - not C--->not A Invalid Conditional Forms If A, then C (affirming consequent) - C--X->A If A, then C (Denying antecedent) - not A--X-->not C The Material Conditional A C A -> C T T T F T T T F F F F T Phil 102 Page 2
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'