PHIL 2003 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Begging, Causal Closure, Grave Danger
25 May 2016
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Inconsistency: the fallacy of arguing for a conclusion by appeal to inconsistent premises, i. e. , premises not all of which can be true together. The course has a lot of practical utility. The two premises are inconsistent with each other. If he loves me, then he"ll be at the party. Problem is, this argument is not logically strong. The two premises do not guarantee that he loves me. There are two main problems with using only the fallacies approach when it comes to assessing arguments. It is incomplete: even with a long list of particular fallacies, there are bound to be some mistakes in reasoning not represented by the list. It relies too much on memory: it"s difficult to remember all the fallacies on a list, particularly when it gets to be very long. Another approach to assessing arguments, which we might use instead (or together with) the fallacies approach, is a criteria one:
