Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Philosophy
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Logic | easoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity |
| rhetoric | The art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing. |
| statement | a declarative sentence. truth-value, can be true or false |
| truth value | either of the values, true or false, that may be taken by a statement |
| argument | a series of statements provided as support for another statement (conclusion) |
| Premise(s) | a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition |
| conclusion | the summing up of an argument |
| inference (inferential claim) | the process of reasoning from one set of principles to another, as in an argument |
| form | contains logical relationship between logic and conclusion |
| content | what the argument is about, the "meat" of the argument |
| deductive argument | if premise is true, conclusion must necessarily be true too |
| valid argument | the conclusion does indeed follow from premise |
| sound argument | if the argument is valid AND all the premises, and conclusion, are true. |
| inductive argument | if the premise is true, conclusion is probably true |
| strong argument | the premise claim to provide strong |
| content | what the argument is about, the metaphorical tofu of the argument |
| deductive argument (deduction) | an instance of reasoning from one principle to another in accord with accepted rules of inference. Sometimes defined more narrowly as the inference from a general premise to a particular conclusion by means of a syllogism |
| valid argument (validity) | said of an argument that correctly follows agreed-upon rules of inference. Always applies to arguments, not statements |
| sound argument (soundness) | a good argument; a deductive argument that is valid and has true premises |
| inductive argument (induction) | the process of inferring general conclusions (for example, ("All swans are white") from a sufficiently large sample of particular observations ("This swan is white, that swan is white, and that one, and that one, and that one...") |
| strong argument (strength) | an inductive argument whose evidence makes the truth of the conclusion highly probable |
| cogent argument (cogency) | persuasive relevance |
| fallacy (formal and informal) | an invalid argument |
| inconsistency | not staying the same throughout; having self-contradictory elements |
| incoherence | lacking coherence; not fitting together in an orderly or logically agreeable fashion. Using fancy jargon that has no precise meaning may be a source of incoherence. So is a mere list of random beliefs, without any order or logic to hold them together. |
| paradox | a self-contradictory or seemingly absurd conclusion based on apparently good arguments |
| tautology | a trivially true statement, or a statement that is necessarily true by virtue of its form |
| begging the question | assuming the truth of the point at issue in a question, for example, "How do I know God would not deceive me?" "Because the natural light of reason with which he endowed me tells me so." |
| ad hominem attack | an argument aimed at criticizing the individual but ignoring the issue completely |
| counterexample method | to argue against inductive generalizations |
Created by:
Papa For
Popular Czech sets