Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (630,000)
York (40,000)
PHIL (800)
Lecture

Class 1 - ethics toolkit lecture 1 argument • Validity is a structural property of argument • Validity doesn’t say if premises or conclusion actually true, conditional claim • The truth of premises guarantee truth of conclusion  that’s what vali


Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHIL 2075
Professor
Kristin Andrews

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 1 pages of the document.
Class 1 - 6 ethics toolkit lecture 1 argument
Validity is a structural property of argument
Validity doesn’t say if premises or conclusion actually true, conditional claim
The truth of premises guarantee truth of conclusion that’s what validity is about
If there is an imaginary world, if premises is true, could conclusion be false? No. Then argument is valid.
An argument can be valid with all false premises & false conclusion
An argument can be valid if one premises is true, other is false, conclusion is true
An argument can be valid if all premises are true
An argument can be valid under all conditions if all premises are true & conclusion is false invalid argument
Looking at structure of sentences How words in sentences relates to one another, connection between premises
One trick look to see if all central or key terms in argument are connected
All key terms in premises & conclusion MUST be connected
If you have a term in premises doesn’t exist in any other premises or conclusion problem with argument
Note key terms in multiple places doesn’t = valid argument
A sound argument is if the premises are true & valid conclusion is true
Just because conclusion is true, doesn’t mean argument is sound (false premises)
Must have reasons for all arguments, reasons to think premises are true can conclude argument is sound
Goal is true beliefs must be consistent
Consistency no tension between sentences, can be false
Contradiction there is tension between sentences
o Talking about two different things, eg. good and not good
o Explicit contradiction good, as in it’s the right thing to do & not the right thing to do, eg. p & not p
o Whether or not the term good is being used in two different senses, if there’s an equivocation used in two
different ways
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version