Philosophical Questions and Logic: Exploring the Nature of Argument and Critique

1. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCING THE BOOK

2. 1 A. Philosophical Questions and Wonder • Children and adults raise philosophical questions in the course of wondering about their world. • Such questions might include “where did the world come from?” “Can plants feel?” “How could anyone know whether plants feel?” “What is the nature of happiness?”

3. 1 B. Features of this Book

4. 1.C. A Little Logic • Introduction: One thing that stands out in the majority of philosophical writings is argument.It is important to understand what “argument” in this context does and does not mean. • Arguments, as discussed by logicians, are statements of reasons for beliefs. They do not have to involve heated disagreements.

5. Logic is concerned with the ways in which people give reasons for their beliefs and actions. • Since people are constantly giving reasons, to themselves and others, for their beliefs and actions, logic is constantly being used by all people. • Philosophers have tried to systematize and evaluate and criticize various forms of argument. • The criticism of arguments from a logical perspective often consists in pointing out fallacies (bad reasoning that may look good to some people).

6. Deductive Arguments and Inductive Arguments • Arguments consists of statements, some of which (the premises) are offered in support of others (the conclusions). • When the premises conclusively support the conclusions, the argument is deductively valid. When the premises make the conclusions more or less probable, the argument is inductive.

7. Arguments are strong when, if the premises are true, they make the conclusion certain or highly probable. • Sound arguments are deductively valid arguments with true premises.

8. Refutation by Counterexample • Logic includes the evaluation and criticism of arguments. • One common form of criticism consists in showing that a given argument is weak by constructing an argument with the same structure as the given argument, but with an obviously false or doubtful conclusion. This is called a refutation by counterexample. • Example: If A throws a cigarette out the window, a fire starts. A fire starts, so A threw the cigarette. • If that does not look like a bad argument, consider this counterexample: • If A drinks strychnine, A dies. A died, so (conclusion) • A drank strychnine. (What if A got run over, or died of old age?)

9. Confusing necessary and sufficient conditions: A further form of criticism consists in showing that an argument depends upon a confusion of necessary and sufficient conditions. • Examples: the presence of oxygen is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition, for fire. The co-presence of oxygen, a combustible material, and a source of combustion, are a sufficient condition for fire. • *Sometimes arguments are weak because a necessary condition has been treated as though it were sufficient. For example, the following is a weak argument: • 1.All thought requires brain activity. • 2. Therefore, thought is nothing but brain activity. • This is a weak argument because it is possible that something else is necessary for thought besides brain activity, just as something else besides oxygen is necessary for fire. It may be that brain activity is not sufficient for thought, even if it is necessary.

10. Reduction to Absurdity • A further form of criticism consists in showing that the statements in an argument lead to a contradiction. Such an argument cannot be strong or sound.

11. Other Kinds of Critiques • There are many other forms of criticism. Arguments are weak when they depend upon irrelevant premises. • For example, the claim that a presidential candidate has a kinky sex life is not relevant to the claim that his foreign policy proposals will not work. An argument that moves from the first claim to the second commits an ad hominem (attacking the person) fallacy.