Deductive Reasoning Example
- You can think critically if you are enrolled to this course
- You are enrolled in this course and I know you are enterprising
- You will be lucky if you are enterprising and you think critically
- You will be successful either if you are hardworking or you are lucky
- So you will be successful
b)
major Premise -You can think critically if you are enrolled to this course
minor Premise- You are enrolled in this course and I know you are enterprising
major Premise- You will be lucky if you are enterprising and you think critically
Intermediate conclusion- You will be successful either if you are hardworking or you are lucky
Conclusion-So you will be successful
The conclusion is valid because the premise corresponds to a fact seen in the real world. The statements also follow deductively the premises propositions and the conclusion is not redundant. The conclusion follows correct logic, it has true premises and the argument is sound.
The standard argument form used here is prepositional logic, where premises and conclusions need each other. The prepositions and the premises in the argument are accepted as providing justification or support of each other. Conclusions and premises require each other because, either standing alone, cannot be considered a conclusion or a premise. The readers ought to see how the main idea is supported with minor points which are ultimately convincing. One preposition follows from the others, where the others are just points used to furnish the main preposition (Van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 2016)..
c)
A valid statement which has valid and strong premises. A conclusion is said to be valid when it is in line with other arguments without any contradictions. Also, the statement has to correspond with something in the real world, useful in practice and people believe that statement can be used. A valid statement also has a good number if people who believe it’s true and the statements should self-deductively follow the premises in a way that is not redundant.
Question 2
Premise- the schedule of the bus says so
Conclusion- the bus will arrive in 5 minutes
Inductive logic operates in two ways. One by confirming instances by advancing conjecture.it operates on the contrary by disconfirming conjecture. In this scenario, every time the bus stops as scheduled, the conjecture will be confirmed increasingly. Every time the bus does not stop as the schedule says, the conjecture will be falsified. The rhetor, or speaker, collects different instances which lead to a certain conclusion. This can literally be seen as accumulation of examples in order to reach a certain conclusion (Ciurria, & Altamimi, 2014).
Question 3
Premise- A study in the U.K involving 10,000 14 year olds shows that brighter girls and girls from poor families are likely to get depressed by the time they enter adolescent.
Inductive Reasoning Example
Premise- Mary is both bright and comes forma poor family
Conclusion- we should monitor her
In this case, the hypothesis that bright 14 year olds are likely to get depressed the time they get to adolescent will advance the conjecture every time a 14 year old from a poor family becomes depressed by 14. The conjecture will be falsified every time an adolescent does not become depressed by the age of 14. Valid inductive arguments go beyond the premises, and it’s more of learning from experience (Woods, & Walton, 2014)
Question 4
The fallacy in this question is argumentum ad verecundiam where the conclusion that telling a lie is not morally wrong is drawn from the authority of how many people believe it is not morally wrong as opposed to drawing supporting arguments as to why telling lies is not morally wrong (Van & Van, 2011).
Question 5
This is a case of agumentum ad hominem and you too arguments fallacies. The argument assert that since one is sleeping with someone else while in a relationship, it makes it right for them to sleep with someone else while in a relationship. Just because one is sleeping with another person, does not make it necessarily right for the other to sleep with a person outside the relationship.
Question 6
This also a classic example of circumstantial ad hominem which is classified under ad hominem arguments, which is fallacious. The argument uses the circumstances of the one making a statement, and not questioning the argument itself. In this case, whether a friend has smoked 2 packets of cigarettes every day for the last 40 years, is irrelevant to the claim that smoking causes cancer and other diseases (Van et.al 2003).
Question 7
The fallacy in this case is that of questionable analogy. The conclusion that similarity of things in one respect makes things similar in other respects makes the argument dubious. In this case saying gay marriage should not be allowed, as marriage is between to people of two different genders is questionable. Just because there is similarity of things in a certain respect, does not mean that they should always be like that (Mackenzie, 1999)
Question 8
The statement in this question is not fallacious as it follows a certain syllogism, where there are premises and conclusions creating a sound and valid argument.
Question 9
According to Collins English Dictionary, a republic is a country where people elect the president, and the power vests with the people unlike those being ruled by kings and queens. It is a country where the members of the public share vested interests. The biggest failing of a republic is when the government has become weak, that they no longer have control (Walton,& Koszowy, 2014).
Question 10
God is defined as the supreme creator of the universe and is worshipped as the ruler and creator of the universe. The biggest failing definition of God is that he cannot be proven, hence easily dismissible without evidence (Godwin, 1998).
Question 11
A Racists have a platform like twitter which give people power that they have never had before.
- the platform seems to have such powers as we see videos by such racists go viral. With the rise of the @charlottes, there was wrong identification of people due to misleading information on the online racists. The racists are also said to carry their sleuthing online. People also take their racism without doing anything about it as they blow their whistles.
- The author is correct about the rise of racism and the online increased support due to availability of platform. The author also attributes some of the happenings to professional journalism and that they contribute to the growth of such people. According to the author, networks like twitter give such people platforms, giving them power as well. With twitter and other social media platforms, the implications of political cultures around us have changed. Information can easily be shared and disseminated and even careless comments can have profound impact on people; there is therefore need for responsible journalism and control of how social media operates.
References
Ciurria, M., & Altamimi, K. (2014). Argumentum ad verecundiam: New gender-based criteria for
appeals to authority. Argumentation, 28(4), 437-452.
Goodwin, J. (1998). Forms of authority and the real ad verecundiam. Argumentation, 12(2), 267-
280.
Mackenzie, P. T. (1999). Ad hominem and ad verecundiam. Informal Logic, 3(3), 9-11.
Van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2016). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A
pragma-dialectical perspective. Routledge.
Van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2003). Fallacies as derailments of strategic maneuvering: The argumentum ad verecundiam, a case in point. SICSAT.
Van Vleet, J. E., & Van Jacob, E. V. (2011). Informal logical fallacies: A brief guide. University
Press of America.
Walton, D., & Koszowy, M. (2014). Two kinds of arguments from authority in the ad verecundiam
fallacy. Two Kinds of Arguments from Authority in the Ad Verecundiam Fallacy.
Woods, J., & Walton, D. (2014). Argumentum ad verecundiam. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 135-153.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
