LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINGING

COURSE CODE: PHIL 1011

Course Instructor Minda W.

College of Social Science and Humanities

Arba Minch University
October, 2019
 Chapter TWO
basic concept of logic

CONTENTS
 Basic concepts of logic
Arguments, premise and conclusion

 Techniques of recognizing arguments

Recognizing argumentative passages

Recognizing non-argumentative passages

 Types of Arguments: Deductive and Inductive Arguments

 Evaluating arguments:
Evaluating Deductive Arguments; Validity, Truth and Soundness


 Chapter Objectives:

 Dear students, after the successful completion of this chapter,

you will be able to:
 Understand the meaning and basic concepts of logic;
 Understand the meaning, components, and types of arguments; and

 Recognize the major techniques of recognizing and evaluating

arguments.
 4
Meaning of Logic

Logic is
 It is an organized body of knowledge, or science that
evaluates arguments.
 Cont.

Aim of logic
 To develop a system of methods and principles that used for
evaluating the arguments of others;
 Guides in constructing arguments of our own.
 Logic is the study of the methods and principles which are used
to distinguish Good (correct) from bad (incorrect) arguments.
 The study of logic is one of the best ways to refine one’s natural
ability to reason and argue.
 Importance of Learning Logic

Logic sharpens and refines our natural gifts to think, reason and
argue.(C. S. Layman).
To develop the skill to construct sound (good) and fallacy-free
arguments of one‘s own and to evaluate the arguments of
others;
To defend prejudiced and uncivilized attitudes that oppose a
civilized and democratic society;
 To identify the common logical errors in reasoning;
To disclose ill-conceived policies in the political sphere
 Cont’d
7

Argument
It is a systematic combination of two or more statements( premise or premises
and conclusion).
• A premise (which can be one or more than one) is a statement, which provides
reason or support for the conclusion, and conclusion is one.
• A conclusion is a statement, which is claimed to follow from the given
evidence (premise).
 An argument is a group of statements.
 A statement is a declarative sentence that has a truth-value of either true or
false.
 Truth and falsity are the two possible truth-values of a statement
 Cont.

A) Dr. Abiy Ahmed the current Prime Minister of Ethiopia.

B) Mekelle is the capital city of Tigray Region.
C) Ethiopia was colonized by Germany.
NB. A and B are true and truth is their truth value.
C is false and falsity is its truth value.
• In this chapter, the term statement is used to refer premises and
a conclusion.
There are sentences that are not statements.
 Cont.
9

Examples
• Would you close the window? (Question)
• b) Let us study together. (Proposal)
• c) Right on! (Exclamation)
• d) I suggest that you read philosophy texts. (Suggestion)
• e) Give me your ID Card, Now! (Command).
None of the above sentences can be either true or false. Hence,
none of them can be classified as statement. As a result, none of
them can make up an argument.
 Cont’d
10

 Constructing arguments;
Example-1
• All Ethiopians are Africans. (Premise 1)
• Tsionawit is Ethiopian. (Premise2)
• Therefore, Tsionawit is African. (Conclusion)
Example-2
• Some Africans are black. (Premise-1)
• Zelalem is an African. (Premise-2)
• Therefore, Zelalem is black. (Conclusion )
 • Distinguishing premises from conclusion and vice versa:
11

The first technique that can be used to identify premises from a conclusion and
vice versa is looking at an indicator word.
Some Conclusion Indicators:
Therefore Entails that It must be that

Wherefore Accordingly We may conclude

Provided that It shows that Hence

Thus Consequently As a result

 Cont.
12

Women are mammals.

Zenebech is a woman.
There fore, Zenebech is a mammal.
Some typical Premise Indicators:
• Since As
• As indicated by For
• Because In that
• Owing to May be inferred from
• Seeing that In as much as
• Given that For the reason that
 Cont’d
13

Example:
• You should avoid any form of cheating on exams because cheating on
exams is punishable by the Senate Legislation of the University.
• Sometimes you may found an argument that contains no indicator all;
neither a conclusion indicator word nor a premise indicator word.
 When this happens, the reader/ listener must ask himself or herself such
questions as:
 What single statement is claimed (implicitly) to follow from the others?
 What is the arguer trying to prove?
 What is the main point in the passage?
 Cont’d
14

• The answers to these questions should point to the conclusion.

Our country should increase the quality and quantity of its military. Ethnic
conflicts are recently intensified; boarder conflicts are escalating; international
terrorist activities are increasing. (there is no indicator words). The main point of
this argument is to show that the country should increase the size and quality
of its military.
The following is the standard form of this argument:
• Ethnic conflicts are recently intensified. (P-1)
• Boarder conflicts are escalating. (P-2)
• International terrorist activities are increasing. (P-3)
• Thus, the country should increase the quality and quantity of its military. (C)
 Cont.
15

• Depending on the logical and real ability of the premise(s) to support

the conclusion, an argument can be either a good argument or a bad
argument.
• Arguments where the premise really supports the conclusion are good
arguments and those which are on the contrary are bad arguments.
• Arguments can generally be divided into deductive and inductive
arguments.
A deductive argument can be evaluated by its validity and soundness,
where as an inductive argument can be evaluated by its strength and
cogency.
 Techniques of Recognizing Arguments
16

• An argument is a systematic combination of one or more than one

statements.
• However, not all passages that contain two or more statements are
argumentative.
• There are various passages that contain two or more statements but are
not argumentative.
• We will see the techniques of distinguishing argumentative passages from
non-argumentative passages.
 Recognizing Argumentative Passages
17

 A passage contains an argument if it purports to prove something; if it

does not do so, it does not contain an argument.
Two conditions must be fulfilled for a passage to purport to prove
something:
 At least one of the statements must claim to present evidence or reasons.
 There must be a claim that the alleged evidence or reasons supports
• In arguments premises must claim to present evidence or reasons, and
there must be a claim that the evidence or reasons support or imply
something.
 Cont.
18

Claims may be factual or inferential claim

The inferential claim is simply the claim that the passage expresses a certain kind
of reasoning process- that something supports or implies something.
It is an objective feature of an argument grounded in its language or
structure. It can be either explicit or implicit.
An Explicit inferential claim is usually asserted by premise or conclusion
indicator words (thus, since, because, hence, therefore, and so on).
Example: Gamachuu is my biological father, because my mother told so.
In this example, the premise indicator word because expresses the claim that
evidence supports something, or that evidence is provided to prove something.
 Cont.
19

• An implicit inferential claim is an inferential relationship between the

statements in a passage, but the passage contains no indicator words.
Example:
The genetic modification of food is risky business. Genetic engineering
can introduce unintended changes into the DNA of the food-producing
organism, and these changes can be toxic to the consumer.
NB. The mere occurrence of an indicator word by no means guarantees the
presence of an argument.
 Cont.
20

• The presence of an indicator word does not mean that the existing indicator
word actually and always indicate a premises or a conclusions.
• Thus, before deciding that an indicator word indicates a premises or a
conclusion, make sure that the existing indicator word is used to indicate a
premise or a conclusion.
• Examples:
A. Since Edison invented the photograph, there have been many technological
developments.
B. Since Edison invented the photograph, he deserves credit for a major
technological development.
 Cont.
21

In the passage ‘A’ the word ‘since‘ is used in a temporal sense. It means from the time
that.‘‘ Thus, the first passage is not an argument.
In the passage ‘B’ the word ‘since’ is used in a logical sense, and so the passage is an
argument.
Recognizing Non-argumentative Passages
• Non-argumentative passages are passages, which lack an inferential
claim.
• These include simple non-inferential passages, expository passages,
illustrations, explanations, and conditional statements.
• For a passage to be an argument, it not only should contain premises
and a conclusion but also an inferential claim or a reasoning process.
22

Some of the most important forms of non-argumentative passages.

1. Simple Non-inferential Passages (warnings, pieces of advice, statements of belief
or opinion, loosely associated statements, and reports. )
2. Expository Passages…mostly, its objective is not to prove the topic sentence
but only to expand it or elaborate it.
3. Illustrations is an expression involving one or more examples to show how
some thing done.
4. Explanations - It attempts to clarify, or describe such alike why something is
happen .
5. Conditional Statements (is an if . . . Then . . . statement).
Example:
If you study hard, then you will score “A‟ grade.
• Some time, the conditional statement can be re-expressed to form an
argument. Example:-
 If destroying a political competitor gives you joy, then you have a low sense
of morality . (Conditional sentence).
 Destroying a political competitor gives you joy. Therefore, you have a low
sense of morality. (Argument)
• Generally, in deciding whether a passage contains an argument, you
should look for three things:
• 1) indicator words such as “therefore,” “since,” “because,” and so on;
• 2) an inferential relationship between the statements; and
• 3) typical kinds of non-arguments.
• But remember that the mere occurrence of an indicator word does not guarantee the
presence of an argument.
Types of Arguments
Deductive Arguments
• The reasoning process (inference) that an argument involves is expressed
either with certainty or with probability implies deduction and induction
respectively.
• It is an argument incorporating the claim that it is impossible for the
conclusion to be false given that the premises are true.
• Its conclusion is claimed to follow with strict certainty or necessity
• Use special indicator words like certainly, necessarily, absolutely, definitely…
Example 1
All human beings are mortal.
Mr. X is a human being.
Therefore, Mr. X is Mortal
Inductive Arguments
• An argument incorporating the claim that it is improbable for the
conclusion to be false given that the premises are true.
• The conclusion is claimed to follow only probably from the premises.
• The premises may provide some considerable evidence for the conclusion
but they do not necessarily support the conclusion .
 Cont.

• Sufficient condition (evidence) but we cannot be certain about the truth of

the conclusion. However, this does not mean that the conclusion is wrong
or unacceptable.
• Inductive argument use indicator words like probable, improbable,
plausible, implausible, likely, unlikely, and reasonable to conclude.
Example-1:
Most African leaders are blacks.
Mandela was an African leader.
Therefore, probably Mandela was black.
• In the above e.g., the conclusion does not follow from the premises with
strict necessity, but it does follow with some degree of probability
 Differentiating Deductive and Inductive Arguments

As we have seen in beginning, there are three factors that

influence the decision about the deductiveness or inductiveness
of an argument‘s inferential claim.
A, The occurrence of special indicator words,
B, The actual strength of the inferential relationship between
premises and conclusion, and
C, The character or form of argumentation the arguers use.
 Deductive Argumentative Forms

The ff arguments have a distinctive character or form that

indicates that the premises are supposed to provide absolute
support for the conclusion.
1. Mathematical arguments are arguments depend on some
arithmetic and geometric backgrounds.
For Example:
You can put two orange and three bananas in a bag and conclude
that the bag contains five fruits
Statistical argument are inductive since they are characterized by
probabilistic or sampling procedures to arrive at a conclusion.
 Cont.

Syllogisms are arguments consisting of exactly two premises and one conclusion.
Syllogisms can be categorized into three groups.
2. Categorical syllogism: a syllogism is an argument consisting of exactly two
premises and one conclusion.
Categorical syllogism is a syllogism in which the statement begins with one of the
words all, no and some.
Example:
All Egyptians are Muslims.
No Muslim is a Christian.
Hence, no Egyptian is a Christian.
 Cont.

3. Hypothetical syllogism: It is a syllogism having a conditional statement for

one or both of its premises.
Example:
• If our body temperature is beyond the normal condition (37 OC), then we are not
in a normal state of mind. If we are not in normal state of mind, then we would
not cope up with any physical as well as mental challenges. Therefore, if our
body temperature is beyond the normal condition (37 OC), then we would not
cope up with any physical as well as mental challenges.
4. Disjunctive syllogism: it is a syllogism having a disjunctive statement. (I.e. an
either … or statement.)
 Cont.

Example of disjunctive syllogism:

Rewina is either Ethiopian or Eritrean.
Rewina is not Eritrean.
Therefore, Rewina is Ethiopian
5. An argument from definition is a deductive argument form since the
premises already define the truth of the conclusion.
Examples-1.
God is omniscient, it follows that He knows everything.
Example-2.
All animals are mammals.
All mammals are Living things.
Therefore, all animals are living things.
 Inductive form of Arguments

Inductive argument is when content of the conclusion is in some way

intended to go beyond the content of the premises.
1. Prediction is an argument when somebody concludes about the future
based on what was or is happening before as well as now.
 In a prediction the premises deals with some known event in the present
or the past and the conclusions moves beyond this event to some event to
relative future.
This is an inductive argument in the sense that it cannot show the future
with certainty.
Example
It has been raining for the whole day of this week. This shows that it will
 Cont.

2. An argument from analogy: It is an argument that depends on the existence of

an analogy or similarity between two things or state of affairs.
Existence of this analogy/similarity a certain conditions that affects the better-
known thing or situations is concluded to affect the less familiar , lesser known-
thing or situation.
For instance, one may conclude, after observing the similar features of Computer A
and Computer B; that both are manufactured in 2012; that both are easy to
access; that Computer A is fast in processing; it follows that Computer B is also
fast in processing.
3. An inductive generalization: it is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge
of a selected sample to some claim about the whole group.
Sample members characteristics = all members of the group characteristics
 Cont.

4. An argument from authority: it is an argument in which the conclusions rest

upon a statement made by some presumed authority or witness.
5. Arguments based on sign: it is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of
a certain sign to the knowledge of a thing or situation that the sign symbolizes.
For instance, by observing “No Parking” sign posted on the side of a road, the
area is not allowed for parking.
6. A causal inference: it is an argument which proceed from the knowledge of a
cause to the knowledge of an effect or vice versa.
Examples
Kebede is upset so that he is silent. Cause to effect
The meat is dry so that it had been over cooked. Effect to
cause
 Evaluating Arguments

Evaluating Deductive Arguments

 Four terms of evaluating deductive arguments: Valid, Invalid, Sound, and Unsound.
 Deductive argument can be divided into two forms: Valid and
invalid.
A valid deductive argument is an argument such that if the
premises are assumed to be true, the conclusion must be true
(it is impossible for the conclusion to be false). OR
The logical connection between the premises and the conclusion
of a valid deductive argument is a matter of strict necessity, and
if the case is to the opposite, the argument is invalid.
51
END OF CHAPTER TWO