Term
|
Definition
| A pattern of reasoning in which premises are offered as reasons to believe in the truth of conclusions. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A proposition whose truth is not assumed but is to be established by the argument. Use words like "therefore" or "so" in informal presentation. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Argumentative form in which the truth of the premises is intended to lead necessarily to the truth of the conclusion. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
FALLACY
What is to be concluded is assumed to be a premise
"The Bible is God's word. The Bible says so, and God wouldn't lie."
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A or B
Not B
Therefore A
If it's not one, it's the other!
Either Socrates has a pulse, or he is dead. Socrates does not have a pulseTherefore, Socrates is dead
opposite: false dilemma |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
FALLACY
I eat apples and then I am happy. I am happy. Therefore I ate apples.
opposite: modus ponens
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
ARGUMENT
If I ate apples today, then I am happy. I ate apples today. Therefore I am happy.
opposite: affirming the consequent |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
ARGUMENT
When I eat apples I am happy. I didn't eat apples today. Therfore I am not happy.
opposite: denying the antecedent |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
FALLACY
When I eat apples I am happy. I did not eat apples. Therefore I am not happy.
|
|
|
