Class Notes (839,460)
Canada (511,348)
Philosophy (1,300)
Lecture 12

Lecture 12

19 Pages
60 Views

Department
Philosophy
Course Code
Philosophy 1200
Professor
Eric Desjardins

This preview shows pages 1,2,3,4. Sign up to view the full 19 pages of the document.
Description
Welcome to lecture #12! I Assignments to be returned at the end of class I Today: more argument reconstruction + chapter 5 Example I P1. God is something than which nothing greater can be imagined I IC1. There is at least in the understanding something than which nothing greater can be imagined I P2. When the fools hears when he hears he question whether God exists he understands it I P3. Whatever is understood is in the understanding. I IC2. That than which a greater cannot be imagined cannot be in the understanding alone. I P4. If it is at least in the understanding alone, it can be imagined to be in reality too I P5. A being that is in reality as well as in the understanding is greater than a being that is in the understanding alone. I IC3. If that than which a greater cannot be imagined is in the understanding alone, that very thing than which a greater cannot be imagined is something than which a greater can be imagined I P6. It is impossible that that very thing than which a greater Diagram Chapter 5: Assessing arguments (at last!) I What is a good argument? Chapter 5: Assessing arguments (at last!) I What is a good argument? I We said earlier that it was a sound argument: I True premises I Logical strength I A better definition of a good argument uses three criteria. Assessing arguments I Three criteria: I The premises must be acceptable as premises for the argument I The premises must be relevant to the conclusion I The premises must be adequate to support the conclusion Acceptability I Acceptability I The premises must acceptable as premises for the argument Acceptability I Acceptability I The premises must acceptable as premises for the argument I Not just a matter of being true (contrary to what is suggested by Hughes & Lavery) I A premise P can be true but not acceptable as part of a given argument Acceptability I Example of a premise that might be true but is not acceptable: I “If such actions were not illegal, they would not be prohibited by the law” Acceptability I Example of a premise that might be true but is not acceptable: I “If such actions were not illegal, they would not be prohibited by the law” I P1: If actions X were not illegal, they would not be prohibited by the law I MP1: Actions X are prohibited I MC: Actions X are illegal Acceptability I Example of a premise that might be true but is not acceptable: I “If such actions were not illegal, they would not be prohibited by the law” I P1: If actions X were not illegal, they would not be prohibited by the law I MP1: Actions X are prohibited I MC: Actions X are illegal I This is an instance of the fallacy of begging the question I MP1 begs the question in that it would not be acceptable to anyone that needs convincing of the conclusion (because it is a mere reformulation of the conclusion) Fallacy: begging the question I The fallacy of begging the question: I A premise (or a strict subset of premises) of an argument begs the question when it is no more acceptable to the intended audience of the argument than the
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2,3,4 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit