PHIL 105 Lecture 7: Lecture 7

47 views6 pages

Document Summary

Cogent arguments whose patterns dont match feldman"s: every swan i"ve seen has been white, the next swan i"ll see will be white. This is not the argument : most swans are white, the next swan i"ll see will be white, the next swan i"ll see will be white. I have not seen most swans, only the ones i"ve actually seen. What about : all swans are white, the next swan i"ll see is a swan, that swan is white. This is valid (as we"ll see) but it is not the reasoning in question: every swan i"ve seen has been white, all swan are white. We cannot smooth this into a simple pattern. The conclusion goes beyond what is provided by the premises. If certain non-formal conditions (background conditions) are met, it can be a good way to reason. This is a common way to reason. example: when you are deciding where to go out and eat.

Get access

Grade+
$40 USD/m
Billed monthly
Grade+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
10 Verified Answers
Class+
$30 USD/m
Billed monthly
Class+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
7 Verified Answers

Related Documents

Related Questions