The document discusses the importance of thinking and reasoning. It provides three main points: 1. If we do not think for ourselves, others will think for us and control us, enslaving us and taking away our humanity. Therefore, thinking is essential to being human. 2. We are constantly bombarded with reasoning from various sources, so it is important to think critically and not just accept what others say. Studying logic helps improve our ability to think, reason, and evaluate arguments. 3. Political debates involve reasoning and arguing skills. These abilities can be refined through studying logic, which teaches how to identify fallacies and evaluate whether arguments' premises adequately support their conclusions.

1. Aj. Hakim Sudinpreeda
M.A. (Education)
THINKING & REASONING
ALLPPT.com _ Free PowerPoint Templates, Diagrams and Charts

2. • If we do not think ourselves, some other people will think for
us.
• If some other people think for us, they can control us.
• If some other people can control us, we are enslaved by
them.
• If we are enslaved, we have no position of being human.
Therefore, no thinking = no human being
WHY DO WE THINK?

3. • THINKING is a life activity of being human.

4. Everyone thinks.

5. Everyone reasons.

6. Everyone argues.

7. And everyone is subjected
to the reasoning and
arguing of others.

8. • We are bombarded (attacked) daily
with reasoning from many sources:
books, speeches, radio, TV,
newspapers, employers, friends, and
family.

9. Thought provoking

10. Slavoj Zizek
“Just think, Don’t act.”

11. withdrew to a lonely place in Switzerland, where he
‘learned, learned and learned’, reading Hegel’s logic.
And this is what we should do today when we find
ourselves bombarded with mediatic images of
violence”. [p.7]
• If we always learn without acting then we never apply
our knowledge.
• Learning = thinking and not acting
• In a binary opposition

13. “Character is like a tree and
reputation its shadow. The s
hadow is what we think it is
and the tree is the real thing
.”
― Abraham Lincoln

14. POLITICAL DEBATE

15. • Some people think well, reason well, and
argue well. Some do not.
• The ability to think, reason, and argue well
is partly a matter of natural gifts?

16. • And whatever our natural gifts, they can be refin
ed and
sharpened.
• How can we refine and sharpen the
natural gift of thinking?

17. ตรรกะศาสตร ์---- Fallacy ---- ตรรกะป่ วย --- ความไม่มีเหตุผล--- คนบ้า
By the study of logic
• Through the study of logic, one learns
strategies for thinking well,
common errors in reasoning to avoid, and
effective techniques for evaluating arguments.

18. What is logic?

19. What is logic?
Logic is the study of methods for evaluating
arguments. More precisely, logic is the study of metho
ds for evaluating whether the premises of an argument
adequately support (or provide good evidence for) its
conclusion.

20. Argument, Conclusion, Premise, and Support
• Argument is a set of statements where some of
the statements are intended to support another.
• The conclusion is the claim to be supported.
• The premises are the statements offered in
support.

27. Proof of God
• Every thing began to exist has a cau
se.
• The universe began to exist.
• Therefore, the universe has a cause
.

28. Cause of the universe
• A. It creates itself.
• B. It was created by an created creator.
• C. It was created by an uncreated creator
.

29. More about this creator
• It must have a consciousness.
• It must have absolute power.
• It must be independent.

31. The Design and Precision of
the Universe
(Teleological Argument)
The design argument is saying that th
e Universe is so cleverly designed and
so finely balanced – has Fine-Tuning,
this means that somebody has design
ed it like that.

35. Physicist Roger Penrose has calculated
the odds that the entire universe is as or
derly as our galactic neighborhood to be
one in 1010 123, a number whose decimal
representation has vastly more zeroes th
an the number of fundamental particles i
n the observable universe.
(see The Emperor's New Mind, pg. 341-344)

37. If the rate of expansion had been slightly s
lower —by one part in millions— then gra
vity would have caused it to all collapse in
a big crunch. If the rate of expansion had
been slightly faster —by one part in millio
ns— Then gravity couldn’t pull any of the
matter together to form planets, stars and
even gases!

38. More about this creator
• It must be one.
...Had there been in them any god
s except God, they would both ha
ve certainly been in a state of dis
order...".[Anbiya"/22]

40. God does not create things aimlessly.
• The universe is complex.
• The complexity indicates the designer’s intelli
gence.
• The intelligent does things with reasons.
• Therefore, the entire creation of the universe
has a purpose.

41. If God creates the universe and thin
gs within it, God also creates manki
nd as mankind is within the univers
e.

42. What is the purpose of the cr
eation of mankind?

43. • Nobody knows exactly except its cr
eator.
• Only God knows what is the purpo
se of mankind’s creation.

44. BUT----- HOW DO WE KNOW?
• God must tell us by the use of a
communication means.

45. How God communicate
with mankind to inform
them why humans are cr
eated?

46. “The Book of God”

47. 1. It must answer the question: the purpose of hu
man creation.
2. It must be unique: nobody can copy it.
3. It must have a statement that it is from God.
4. It must have no contradictions: between good a
nd bad.
5. It must impact the readers: estimated from the
number of people popularity.

48. • Every logic book contains at least one silly example.
• The Power of Logic is a logic book.
• So, The Power of Logic contains at least one silly example.
• Every Muslim student of Hatyai university whose hometown
is in southern provinces can speak Malay.
• Najmee is from a southern province (Narathiwat).
• Therefore, Najmee can speak Malay.

49. • Every logic book contains at least one silly example.
(Premise 1)
• The Power of Logic is a logic book.
(Premise 2)
• So, The Power of Logic contains at least one silly example.
(Conclusion)

50. • The word “so” indicates that the conclusion of this argume
nt is “The Power of Logic contains at least one silly exam
ple.”
• The argument has two premises—
“Every logic book contains at least one silly example”
and “The Power of Logic is a logic book.”

51. Break down these arguments’ structures
2. If something would have a future of value if
it weren’t killed, then it is wrong to kill it. Most fetuses
would have a future of value if they weren’t killed. So,
it is wrong to kill most fetuses.
3. If fetuses are not persons, then abortion is not
wrong. Fetuses are not persons. So, abortion is not
wrong.

52. Break down these arguments’ structures.
• If something would have a future of value if it weren’t killed,
then it is wrong to kill it. (Premise 1)
• Most fetuses would have a future of value if they weren’t
killed. (Premise 2)
• So, it is wrong to kill most fetuses. (Conclusion)

53. Break down these arguments’ structures.
• If fetuses are not persons, then abortion is not
wrong. (Premise 1)
• Fetuses are not persons. (Premise 2)
• So, abortion is not wrong. (Conclusion)

54. What is argument?

55. An argument is:
• a set of declarative statements that holds
truth values which is either true or false.
• In the statements, there are premises,
which intend to support conclusion.

56. Statement
What is a statement?
• A. Some dogs are collies. (collie refers to a large type
of dog with long hair and a long pointed nose)
• B. No dogs are collies.
• C. Some dogs weigh exactly 124.379 pounds.
• D. All schools must have students.
• E. All schools have good students.
• F. Some students achieve exactly 3.89 GPA.

57. • Statement (A) and (D) are true because they
describe things as they are.
• Statement (B) and (E) are false because they
describe things as other than they are.
The truth value of (A) & (D) are true while the truth value
of (B) and (E) are false, but(A), (B), (D) and (E) are all
statements.

58. Are (C) and (F) statements?

59. Yes.
• No one may know
its truth value, but (C) and (F) are either
true or false, and hence they are statem
ents.

60. Are any of the following items statements?
G. Get your dog off my lawn!
H. How many dogs do you own?
I. Let’s get a dog.
No, it is a command.
No, it is a question.
No, it is a proposal.
• (G) could be obeyed or disobeyed.
• (H) could be answered or unanswered.
• (I) could be accepted or rejected.

61. 1. The sky is blue.
2. Let’s go to the party.
3. Please be silent!
4. Abortion is illegal.
5. Prayuth Chan-o-cha was born in 1963.
6. If Langkawi Island is in Malaysia, then
Langkawi Island is in Malaysia.
7. It is not the case that Ben Franklin.
Recognizing Statements
Statement
Proposal sentence
Command sentence
Statement
Affirmative
sentence
Statement
Neither statement nor
sentence

62. More exercise
8. “Why?” asked Socrates.
9. Table not yes if.
10. Either humans evolved from apes or apes evolved from humans.
11. Davy Crockett died at the Alamo.
12. How are you?
13. If seven is greater than six, then six is greater than seven.
14. Let’s have lunch.
15. Go!
16. Despite the weather.
17. The longest shark in the Pacific Ocean.
18. Either Heather or Cheri.
19. If there is only one human.
20. Either Najmee is angry or Nurisan is depressed.

63. More exercise
8. “Why?” asked Socrates. Affirmative sentence
9. Table not yes if. Neither a sentence nor statement
10. Either humans evolved from apes or apes evolved from humans. Statement
11. Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. Affirmative sentence
12. How are you? Question sentence
13. If seven is greater than six, then six is greater than seven. Statement
14. Let’s have lunch. Proposal sentence
15. Go! Command
16. Despite the weather. Neither a sentence nor statement
17. The longest shark in the Pacific Ocean. Neither a sentence nor statement
18. Either Heather or Cheri. Neither a sentence nor statement
19. If there is only one human. Neither a sentence nor statement
20. Either Najmee is angry or Nurisan is depressed. Statement

64. The following two examples illustrate this distinction:
(1) All philosophers like logic.
Joseph is a philosopher.
So, Joseph likes logic.
Distinguishing premises
(2) Most philosophers like logic.
Peter is a philosopher.
So, Peter likes logic.
Deductive argument Inductive argument

65. • A deductive argument is one in which the
premises are intended
to guarantee the conclusion.
• An inductive argument is one in which the
premises are intended
to make the conclusion probable, without
guaranteeing it.

66. (1) All philosophers like logic.
Joseph is a philosopher.
So, Joseph likes logic.
The premises of argument (1) are intended to support
the conclusion: It is guaranteed that, if they are true, then
the conclusion is true as well.

67. (2) Most philosophers like logic.
Peter is a philosopher.
So, Peter likes logic.
The premises of argument (2) do not directly support the conclusion.
Even if Peter is a philosopher and even if the majority of philosophers
enjoy logic, it is not guaranteed that Peter enjoys logic; he might be amo
ng the minority who do not care for logic at all.
The premises of (2) support the conclusion in a different sense, however: It is
probable that if they are true, then the conclusion is true
as well.

68. Inductive / Deductive?
All DRIC students are supposed to be taught in English as the medium
of instruction. Frenco is a student from DRIC. Therefore, Frenco is sup
posed to be taught in English as his medium of instruction.
Most DRIC students like studying English. Arifeen is a student from DRIC.
Therefore, Arifeen likes studying English. Inductive
Deductive