PHIL 1200 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Gregor Mendel, Fallacy, Agnosticism
Document Summary
He had a large sample and no bias (tested many characteristics) Suppose there are genes that obey certain laws. Each parent contributes half of their genetic material. If the story about genes is true, then we have an answer to the question. He never saw genes, just circumstantial evidence (the ratios) Postulated their existence to explain an experimental result. Experimental crosses in peas were observed to exhibit a 3:1 ratio. Therefore, there are genes and they obey certain rules l. This is invalid because the premises and conclusion don"t have anything to do with each other. If there are genes and they obey laws l, then crosses in the peas should exhibit a 3:1 ratio. Therefore, there are genes and they obey laws. Form: invalid (premises are true & conclusion is false) Modus tollens argument: (valid, but not the right conclusion) If there are genes and they obey laws l, then the experimental cross exhibits a 3:1 ratio.
