1

TOPIC 1
Arguments Part I: Basic Concepts of Logic

Terminology:
- Proposition/Statement: A sentence, or part of a sentence, that attempts to say something
about the world. Statements are typically true or false.
- Premise: A proposition that tries to provide support for the rational acceptance of an
argument.
- Conclusion: A proposition that is affirmed based on other propositions in an argument.
- Argument: A group of propositions, some of which are presented as rational grounds for
accepting the truth of others.
- Inference: A relation of logical support that holds between propositions.

Recognition of Arguments:
- Typically an argument will start with premises that lead to a conclusion. Typically, there will
be premise-indicators and conclusion-indicators.
- Premise-indicators: ‘since’, ‘because’, ‘as indicated by’, etc.
- Conclusion-indicators: ‘hence’, thus’, ‘it follows that’, etc.
- Things are not always this simple: Propositions are not always in declarative form (compare
rhetorical questions, imperatives, etc.), and conclusion- and premise-indicators are not always
present. But an understanding of the text makes it possible to determine whether the writer is
trying to convince the reader of a conclusion based on certain premises.

Implicit Conclusions and Premises/Assumptions

- Arguments frequently contain propositions that are not explicitly stated. When we
reconstruct such an argument we have to make such implicit premises/conclusions explicit.
 2

TOPIC 2
Arguments Part 2: Analysis and Evaluation

Truth and Validity

- NB!: Truth and Validity are independent variables. Validity is a characteristic of an argument,
and depends on the relations between propositions. Truth is a characteristic of a proposition,
and depends on the reality the proposition attempts to represent.
- Test for validity: Given the truth of the premises, is the conclusion necessarily true?
- Validity + Truth = Reliability (soundness)

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

- Deductive reasoning: Given the truth of the premises, can the conclusion be false? Typically,
deductive arguments move from the general to the specific.
- Inductive reasoning: There is another form of reasoning, where the truth of the premises is
only partial support of the conclusion. Based on the truth of the premises the probability
[waarskynlikheid] of the conclusion (the degree to which it is rational to rely on it) is raised.
Typically, inductive reasoning moves from the specific to the general.

The Evaluation of Arguments

- 1. Establish exactly what the argument entails (identify premises and conclusion).
- 2. Establish whether the propositions are true.
- 3. Test for validity.
- Based on the above-mentioned arguments can be classified as true/false, valid/invalid, or
reliable/unreliable

I. Some valid arguments contain only true propositions - true premises and a true conclusion:

 All mammals have lungs.

 All whales are mammals.
 Therefore all whales have lungs.

II. Some valid arguments contain only false propositions:

 All four-legged creatures have wings.

 All spiders have four legs.
 Therefore all spiders have wings.
 3

III. Some invalid arguments contain only true propositions - all their premises are true, and their
conclusions are true as well:

If I owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then I would be wealthy.

 I do not own all the gold in Fort Knox.
 Therefore I am not wealthy.

IV. Some invalid arguments contain only true premises and have a false conclusion. This can be
illustrated with an argument exactly like the previous one (III) in form, changed only enough
to make the conclusion false:

 If Rockefeller owned all the gold in Fort Knox, then Rockefeller would be wealthy.
 Rockefeller does not own all the gold in fort Knox.
 Therefore Rockefeller is not wealthy.

 The premises of this argument are true, but its conclusion is false - and such an argument
cannot be valid, because it is impossible for the premises of a valid argument to be true and
for its conclusion to be false.

V. Some valid arguments have false premises and a true conclusion:

 All fish are mammals.

 All whales are fish.
 Therefore all whales are mammals.

 The conclusion of this argument is true, as we know; moreover it may be validly inferred from
the two premises, both of which are wildly false.

VI. Some invalid arguments also have false premises and a true conclusion:

All mammals have wings.

 All whales have wings.
 Therefore all whales are mammals.

 It emerges clearly from examples V and VI taken together that we cannot tell, from the fact
that an argument has false premises and a true conclusion, whether it is valid or invalid.

VII. Some invalid arguments, of course, contain all false propositions - false premises and a false
conclusion:

 All mammals have wings.

 All whales have wings.
 Therefore all mammals are whales.
 4

TOPIC 3
Arguments Part 3: Diagrams

You need to vote because democracy doesn’t work if you do not vote.

STEP 1: IDENTIFY AND LIST THE PROPOSITIONS IN ORDER

St. 1 You need to vote.
St. 2 Democracy doesn’t work if you do not vote.

STEP 2: RECONSTRUCT THE ARGUMENT IN ORDINARY LANGUAGE

Premise 1 = St. 2: Democracy doesn’t work if you do not vote.
Conclusion = St. 1: You need to vote.

STEP 3: CONSTRUCT A DIAGRAM OF THE ARGUMENT

PASSAGES WHICH INCLUDE MORE THAN ONE ARGUMENT:

For a movie to reach true greatness it is necessary that it has mass appeal, artistic merit,
creativity and Ben Stiller. It is therefore obvious that Zoolander is the only truly great film of
our time. Zoolander was a box office smash, was praised in academic journals (and is the
favourite film of Stephen Hawking), and broke new ground in the use of the human face as
means of communication.
 5

TOPIC 4

Fallacies

- Fallacy: a persuasive argument that is invalid

- 4 main types: relevance, defective induction, presumption, ambiguity

1. Fallacies of relevance (premise irrelevant to conclusion)

i. Appeal to the populace (Argumentum ad Populum): Argument appealing to popular belief
ii. Appeal to emotion and appeal to pity (Ad Misericordiam): Argument based on emotions
elicited, with specific emphasis on sympathy
iii. The red herring: Distraction
iv. The straw man: Misrepresentation of opponent’s position
v. Argument against the person (Ad Hominem): Argument against the person instead of the
proposition
vi. Appeal to force (Ad Baculum): To convince through intimidation
vii. Irrelevant conclusion (Ignoratio elenchi): The conclusion misses the point of the premises
2. Fallacies of defective induction (ineffective premises)
i. Argument from ignorance (Ad Ignorantiam): argument for the truth of a statement based
on the lack of conflicting evidence
ii. Appeal to inappropriate authority (Ad Verecundiam): Appeal to experts not relevance
(note: experts are often relevant)
iii. False cause (non Causa pro Causa): Falsely asserts causality
iv. Hasty generalization (converse accident): Overgeneralization based on one case or very
few cases
3. Fallacies of presumption (deceives the reader through ‘smuggling in’ unjustifiable implicit
premises)
i. Accident (generalization mistakenly applied to a particular case)
ii. Complex question (Plurium Interrogationum): the implicit insertion of an unjustifiable
conclusion in a question
iii. Begging the question (Petitio Principii): Assumes the truth of the conclusion in the
premises
4. Fallacies of ambiguity
i. Equivocation: confusion regarding different meanings of the same word
ii. Amphiboly: confusion as a result of grammar
iii. Accent: confusion as a result of the change of emphasis in a proposition
iv. Composition: confusing parts with wholes
v. Division: confusing wholes with parts
 6

TOPIC 5
Logical Functions of Language and Different Kinds of Meaning

Functions of Language

- Informative/descriptive language: is used to state facts, to say things that can be true or false
- Directive/prescriptive language: used to command something that should be done, states
whether it is good or bad, commands, advice, etc.
- Expressive/evocative language: used to express or convey an emotion

Cognitive and Emotive Meaning

- There are two elements involved when it comes to the meaning of a word: Cognitive and
Emotive
- Cognitive meaning (correlates roughly with the informative/descriptive function of language):
It is the part of meaning that refers to reality. Determines the truth- or falsity conditions of the
proposition within which it functions
- Emotive meaning (correlates roughly with the expressive/evocative function of language):
This is the part of meaning that conveys the mood, feeling or judgement associated with the
word. Can be roughly divided into positive, negative, and neutral
- Example: The terms ‘terrorist’ and ‘freedom fighter’ are often used by different people to refer
to the same person. Cognitively speaking the two terms have the same meaning. But
emotively speaking the judgements associated with the two terms differ. ‘terrorist’ = negative,
‘freedom fighter’ = positive.

Manipulation of Language and Ideology

- Ideology: “Ideology is meaning in the service of power”. An ideology is a worldview that

blinds one to reality, and is usually in service of oppression and exploitation (evocative
meaning of ‘ideology’?)
- Many expressions carry the stamp of the ideology within which they were created, and serves
that worldview. The term may appear purely cognitive, but an unnoticed emotive/ideological
component is communicated.
 7

TOPIC 6
Dispute and Definitions: Part 1

Disputes

1) Factual disputes: A real dispute about the facts of the matter.

2) Value dispute: A real dispute about the evaluation of an issue
3) Verbal dispute: A dispute that seems real, but is not, because of ambiguity in language.
4) Apparently verbal, but really a real dispute: It appears that the dispute is not real, but due
to an apparent ambiguity in language. But even when we remove the ambiguity, the
parties involved still do not agree. Mostly there will be a real dispute concerning values
that remains.

Definitions

Definiendum: The term being defined. Definiens: The phrase used to define.
There are different types of definition, namely:
1) Stipulative definitions: The proposal of a new definition for a new symbol, or an old
symbol in a new context. Note: Such a definition cannot be true or false. It is a proposal,
and can only be useful or not.
2) Lexical definitions: A definition that attempts to give an already existent meaning of a
definiens. Since it is trying to express an already existent fact about language usage, it can
be true or false.
3) Precising definitions: A precising definition tries to clear up vagueness in the use of a
term. (Note! Vagueness and ambiguity are not the same thing. ‘Vagueness’ concerns the
existence of boundary cases in the application of a term, ‘ambiguity’ concerns distinct
‘meanings’ of a term.) A precising definition has both stipulative and lexical elements.
4) Theoretical definitions: A theoretical definition attempts to give a theoretically adequate or
scientifically useful description of the object to which a term refers. It can be true or false.
5) Persuasive definitions: Definitions mostly use descriptive language. When expressive or
emotive language is used in an attempt to persuade by arousing emotions, it is a
‘persuasive definition’.
 8

TOPIC 7
Disputes and Definitions: Part 2

Denotation and Connotation

- Denotation (Extension): The collection of objects that can be denoted/referred to by a

specific term. Example: Denotation of ‘bachelor’ includes all actual bachelors in the world.
- Connotation (Intension): Set of attributes/properties shared by all objects, and only those
objects, which a term denotes. Example: Connotation of ‘bachelor’: ‘unmarried, adult, male’.

Denotative Techniques of Definition

1) Definition by example (enumerative definition): Present an example.

2) Ostensive definition: Pointing out. (“…‘desk’ means this” accompanied by gesture).
3) Quasi-ostensive definition: Ostensive definition plus a descriptive phrase (“…‘desk’
means this piece of furniture” accompanied by gesture).
Denotative definitions, while useful, are not logically able to independently specify the
meaning of a term.

Connotative Techniques of Definition

When defining, we are interested in the conventional connotation, i.e. the criteria
conventionally used by speakers to decide, of any object, whether it is part of the term’s
denotation.
1) Synonymous definitions: Give a synonym.
2) Operational definitions: States that the term is correctly applied if a specified operation
yields a specified result.
3) Definition by genus and difference: Name the genus of which the species is a subclass,
and then name the attribute (specific difference) that distinguishes it from other species of
that subclass. 5 rules for definition by genus and subclass:
i. A definition should state essential attributes.
ii. A definition must not be circular (also taken to forbid synonyms and antonyms).
iii. A definition should not use ambiguous, obscure or figurative language.
iv. A definition should not be too broad or too narrow.
v. A definition should not be negative where it can be affirmative.
 9

TOPIC 8
Value Laden and Politically Correct Language

- Politically correct language reflects an attempt to purge language of underlying value

judgments and prejudices. Societies change over time and sometimes we want to have new
terms in order to reflect these changes in our society. The project in favour of politically
correct language tries to keep language in step with society. It can also reflect an attempt to
change the society.

- Politically correct language concerns the emotive meaning rather than the connotation or
denotation of a term.

- The difference between the emotive meaning of two terms with the same denotation and
connotation can almost be a like a ‘gestalt switch’.

- There are dangers to politically correct language.

1. It can hide exploitation.

2. It can be so laughable that it actually undermines itself.
3. It can jeopardize terms that do not really cause problems.
4. It can undermine our ability to communicate.
5. The purging of politically correct language can jeopardize works of art (novels,
poetry) that use these terms in a way that should be understood contextually.
6. Laughable examples are frequently parodied and the problem is made worse. For
some people ‘politically correct’ is now, itself, a value laden and derogatory term.
7. It can emphasise discrimination rather than ending it.

- Note: Sometimes terms chosen for their neutrality can develop a different emotive meaning
over time. It can also acquire the emotive meaning of the original term.
10