PHIL 210 Lecture 4: PHIL 210 ch5,6 notes
8 Dec 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Ad hominem: choosing to attack the person making the argument rather than addressing the points raised in the argument itself. Affirming the consequent: an invalid argument in the form "if p then q (premise 1). This invalid form is often confused with the valid form modus ponens. Defeasibility: the quality of ampliative reasoning that leaves it open to amendment. Even if inductive arguments are cogent (solid), they are still defeasible, meaning they may have to be revised or rejected if new information comes to light that doesn"t support the conclusions. Denying the antecedent: an invalid argument in the form " if p then q (premise 1). It is not the case that p (premise 2). Therefore, it is not the case that q (conclusion). " This invalid form is easily confused with the valid form modus tollens. Equivocation: a fallacy that involves changing the definition of terms in different premises or conclusions of a single argument.
