第一週學習單：教學用Ppt
•
0 likes•437 views
The document discusses the differences between validity and truth as they relate to propositions and arguments. It defines propositions as claims about the world that can be true or false. Arguments are structures that connect premises to a conclusion. An argument is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false, due to its logical structure. The truth of a proposition depends on how the world is, while the validity of an argument depends only on its structure. A valid argument can have a false conclusion if its premises are false, even if the structure is truth-preserving.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Download to read offline
Recommended
Relative pronouns
This document provides an overview of relative pronouns and how they are used in relative clauses to provide additional information about a noun or pronoun. It discusses the different relative pronouns used for people, things, places, and possession. It also covers defining vs non-defining relative clauses and provides examples of their usage.
The journal 2
The document summarizes a class that covered several social psychology concepts. The class began with an experiment demonstrating conformity, where students were told the incorrect answer to a question and most conformed by agreeing. Later concepts included obedience shown through dangerous experiments, and the bystander effect shown through a video of people ignoring a screaming girl being kidnapped. The class ended with a discussion of group work efficiency and its potential consequences.
Kartikey
THIS IS FOR THOSE STUDENT WHO CAN SLOWER IN STUDY OR WHO CAN KNOW ABOUT THE DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH . HERE IS ALL ABOUT THE SPEECH YOU CAN EASYLI READ & LEARN .
Logic
Logic is the study of correct reasoning through analyzing propositions, which are simple statements that can be either true or false. An expression tree visually represents how a formula is constructed from propositions and logical operators, while logic gates are physical devices that perform operations to describe computer circuits.
Unit 1-logic
This document contains examples and exercises related to logic and propositions. It introduces topics like propositional logic, truth tables, predicates, quantification, and preconditions/postconditions. Some key points:
- Propositions are statements that can be either true or false. Truth tables can be used to determine the truth value of compound propositions.
- Predicates are statements with variables that can be evaluated as true or false by assigning values to the variables.
- Quantifiers like "for all" (universal) and "there exists" (existential) are used to specify the scope of predicates being true.
- Preconditions and postconditions describe the valid inputs and expected outputs of programs to verify
Logic
This document discusses knowledge-based logical agents and concepts from propositional logic. It introduces how knowledge bases represent what agents know and can be used to determine actions. Propositional logic syntax and semantics are explained using sentences about pits and breezes in the Wumpus world. Key concepts in logic are defined such as logical equivalence, validity, satisfiability and the relationship between inference, entailment and sound/complete derivation of sentences.
Notes for logic
1. The document discusses the key concepts of logic including arguments, propositions, premises, conclusions and the validity of arguments.
2. It provides examples to illustrate inductive and deductive arguments, and distinguishes between arguments and explanations.
3. Arguments are considered valid if the truth of the premises necessarily implies the truth of the conclusion, while invalid arguments can have true premises and conclusions but the conclusion does not logically follow.
Logic Notes
The document discusses different types of logical statements and their truth values. It defines simple and compound statements, truth tables, negation, conjunction, disjunction, implication, converse, and biconditional. Examples are provided to illustrate each concept, such as truth tables showing the possible truth value combinations of statements connected by logical operators like "and", "or", and "if-then".
Recommended
Relative pronouns
This document provides an overview of relative pronouns and how they are used in relative clauses to provide additional information about a noun or pronoun. It discusses the different relative pronouns used for people, things, places, and possession. It also covers defining vs non-defining relative clauses and provides examples of their usage.
The journal 2
The document summarizes a class that covered several social psychology concepts. The class began with an experiment demonstrating conformity, where students were told the incorrect answer to a question and most conformed by agreeing. Later concepts included obedience shown through dangerous experiments, and the bystander effect shown through a video of people ignoring a screaming girl being kidnapped. The class ended with a discussion of group work efficiency and its potential consequences.
Kartikey
THIS IS FOR THOSE STUDENT WHO CAN SLOWER IN STUDY OR WHO CAN KNOW ABOUT THE DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH . HERE IS ALL ABOUT THE SPEECH YOU CAN EASYLI READ & LEARN .
Logic
Logic is the study of correct reasoning through analyzing propositions, which are simple statements that can be either true or false. An expression tree visually represents how a formula is constructed from propositions and logical operators, while logic gates are physical devices that perform operations to describe computer circuits.
Unit 1-logic
This document contains examples and exercises related to logic and propositions. It introduces topics like propositional logic, truth tables, predicates, quantification, and preconditions/postconditions. Some key points:
- Propositions are statements that can be either true or false. Truth tables can be used to determine the truth value of compound propositions.
- Predicates are statements with variables that can be evaluated as true or false by assigning values to the variables.
- Quantifiers like "for all" (universal) and "there exists" (existential) are used to specify the scope of predicates being true.
- Preconditions and postconditions describe the valid inputs and expected outputs of programs to verify
Logic
This document discusses knowledge-based logical agents and concepts from propositional logic. It introduces how knowledge bases represent what agents know and can be used to determine actions. Propositional logic syntax and semantics are explained using sentences about pits and breezes in the Wumpus world. Key concepts in logic are defined such as logical equivalence, validity, satisfiability and the relationship between inference, entailment and sound/complete derivation of sentences.
Notes for logic
1. The document discusses the key concepts of logic including arguments, propositions, premises, conclusions and the validity of arguments.
2. It provides examples to illustrate inductive and deductive arguments, and distinguishes between arguments and explanations.
3. Arguments are considered valid if the truth of the premises necessarily implies the truth of the conclusion, while invalid arguments can have true premises and conclusions but the conclusion does not logically follow.
Logic Notes
The document discusses different types of logical statements and their truth values. It defines simple and compound statements, truth tables, negation, conjunction, disjunction, implication, converse, and biconditional. Examples are provided to illustrate each concept, such as truth tables showing the possible truth value combinations of statements connected by logical operators like "and", "or", and "if-then".
Logic 2 validity, other notions
This document defines key logical concepts including:
1. Sentences contain information that can be true or false, while questions, exclamations, and commands do not count as sentences.
2. An argument is invalid if it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false, or if the conclusion does not follow from the premises. A valid argument is one where the conclusion must be true if the premises are.
3. A sound argument has true premises and is valid, such that the conclusion follows from and is entailed by the premises. Deductive arguments reason from general to particular, while inductive arguments reason from particular to general.
Reason Continued
The document discusses different types of logic, including deductive and inductive reasoning. It notes that deductive reasoning is more certain but less informative than inductive reasoning. It also discusses what distinguishes good generalizations from bad ones, including considering number and variety of examples, exceptions, coherence, and subject area. The document describes how logic can help get closer to truth when premises are true and arguments are valid, but gives examples of when conclusions could be tentatively accepted. It also discusses common fallacies in reasoning such as post hoc, ad hominem, circular reasoning, equivocation, and false dilemmas.
Critical reading
Here is a generative scenario to discuss improving the critical thinking activities:
You are instructors who have been asked to review the critical thinking activities designed by a colleague, John Blake, and provide feedback on how to strengthen them. You notice some issues and have some ideas for improvements. However, you want to have a respectful discussion to understand your colleague's perspective and generate collaborative solutions.
How might you approach John to have a productive discussion? What questions might you ask to better understand the goals and thinking behind the activities? What suggestions could you offer to enhance the learning experience while maintaining a spirit of collaboration?
Take 10 minutes to role play this discussion with your partner. Focus on understanding different perspectives and finding areas of agreement to
Phil21 wk3 arguments & moral reasoning
1. The document discusses moral reasoning and using arguments to validate moral views, noting that beliefs and opinions are propositional claims that can be true or false.
2. It defines what constitutes an argument, noting that a good argument has true premises that are relevant to supporting the conclusion.
3. The document distinguishes between deductive arguments, which aim to prove a conclusion, and inductive arguments, which provide support for a conclusion rather than proving it definitively.
Conditionals
Here are the types of conditionals for the sentences:
1. Zero conditional
2. First conditional
3. Third conditional
4. Zero conditional
5. First conditional
6. Zero conditional
7. Second conditional
8. Third conditional
9. Second conditional
10. Third conditional
Inductive And Deductive Argument.pptx
Deductive Argument
For a deductive argument, if all its premises are true, its conclusion is necessarily true (or it is logically impossible for the conclusion to be false.)
I.e., the truth of premises guarantees the truth of conclusion.
Example
Either you work hard or you will fail the test.
You do not work hard.
Therefore, you will fail the test.
3 Types of Possibility
Technological possibility:
e.g.
Going to the moon is technological possible, but going to Mercury is not.
Physical possibility:
e.g.
Going to Mercury is physical possible, but making water boil at 95 C under one atmospheric pressure is not.
Logical possibility:
e.g.
Making water boil at 95 C under one atmospheric pressure is logical possible, but drawing a triangle with 4 angles is not.
When we talk about deductive arguments, we have already presupposed that the arguments are successful or valid deductive arguments.
The conclusion of a valid argument is called a valid conclusion.
For an unsuccessful deductive argument (the premises are intended to guarantee the conclusion but fail to do so), we call it an invalid argument.
A deductive argument may be valid or invalid, there is nothing in between.
Whether a deductive argument is valid or invalid depends on its form or structure, not on its content.
The above argument is valid because it has this valid form:
p or q.
Not-p.
Therefore, q.
p and q are statement variables.
A valid argument may have false conclusion if it has false premises.
Example:
CY Leung is either a genius or an idiot.
He is not an idiot.
Therefore, He is a genius.
In order to guarantee the truth of conclusion, we have to make sure all the premises are true.
When all the premises of a valid argument are true, the argument is called a “sound argument”.
And the conclusion of a sound argument is called a sound conclusion.
If an argument is invalid or has false premises, it is unsound.
On the other hand, the fact that an argument is invalid does not entail that its conclusion is false.
• It just means that its conclusion does not follow from its premises.
• You can consider a valid argument structure as a truth-keeping machine:
• When you input T information into it, it will output T information.
• When you input F information into it, it will output T or F information
Inductive Argument:
A typical example of inductive argument:
Swan1 is white.
Swan2 is white.
Swan3 is white.
…
Swann is white.
________________
All swans are white.
Another typical example:
An event of type B follows an event of type A at time t1.
An event of type B follows an event of type A at time t2.
…
An event of type B follows an event of type A at time tn.
___________________________
A causes B.
Many people think that the characteristic of inductive arguments is arguing from particular to general.
However, deductive arguments may also argue from particular to general.
Example:
I have two cats, Fluffy and Garfield.
Fluffy does not eat fish.
Garfield does not eat fish either.
Therefore, All of m
LESSON-2-METHOS-OF-PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
Here are examples of statements demonstrating each type of bias:
1. Attribution effect: "He failed the exam so he must be lazy."
2. Confirmation bias: "I don't believe the studies showing vaccines are safe because I'm convinced they cause autism."
3. Framing: "The debate focuses on tax cuts and ignores spending cuts."
4. Hindsight: "In retrospect it was obvious they would get divorced."
5. Conflict of interest: "As an employee of the company, I think their practices are ethical."
6. Cultural bias: "Their parenting style is too permissive based on my cultural upbringing."
Recognizing Fallacies Constructing sound arguments requires .docx
Recognizing Fallacies
Constructing sound arguments requires valid logic and reasoning. If your premises (reasoning) are incorrect they are considered to be “fallacies”. There are several different types of fallacies that exist. Once you recognize the fallacies you are more likely to avoid them in your reasoning.
(Hint: refer to textbook Chapter 11 for more information on fallacies.)
1.
Match
each fallacy with its definition in the chart below.
A. Begging the question
G. Appeal to fear
H. Questionable cause
B. Hasty generalization
C. False dilemma
I. Two wrongs make a right
D Slippery slope J. Misidentification of the cause
E. Appeal to authority
F. Bandwagon
___
.
Also known as circular reasoning because the reasoning assumes the conclusion is true.
___
.
Sometimes occurs due to “peer pressure” or groupthink phenomenon when you may be influenced to conform to the opinion of the group.
___
.
A causal situation where we are unsure of the actual root cause of the issue. It’s possible to ignore a possible cause or to incorrectly assume a common cause.
___
.
This argument states that the action (or conclusion) is a justified response to another wrong action (or conclusion).
___
.
This occurs when there is no real evidence for the argument. Superstitions are a good example of this.
___
.
The “either/or” fallacy – the argument presents only two extreme alternatives and does not allow for alternative options.
___
.
Indicates that one negative action will lead to another, and then another worse one, and so on and so forth all leading to a terrible end result
___
.
Basing a belief on a source or person who is not qualified to give an expert opinion on the subject.
___
.
The argument supports its conclusion not by evidence, but by demands or threats of punishment or misfortune.
___
.
A general conclusion is reached based on a very small sample, so the reasons provide weak support for the conclusion.
Deductive Argument
In a deductive argument, the premises (reasoning) provide such strong support for the conclusion that, if the premises are true, then it would be impossible for the conclusion to be false. Deductive arguments are VALID or INVALID.
EXAMPLE:
Valid
– All children are young.
Johnny is a child.
Therefore, Johnny is young.
Invalid – All children are young.
Johnny is a child.
Therefore, all children are Johnny.
Complete each deductive argument below with a valid conclusion.
2.
Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
Premise 2: I am human.
Conclusion: Therefore, I am _______________
3.
Premise 1: All birds have feathers.
Premise 2: Cardinals are birds.
Conclusion: Therefore, cardinals have _______________
4.
Premise 1: There is a party at work today.
Premise 2: Jimmy is sick and not at work today.
Con.
Mc4 logic and critical thinking
This document discusses different types of logical arguments: deductive arguments, inductive arguments, and fallacious arguments. It provides examples of each type and explains the key differences between them. Deductive arguments have conclusions that are necessarily true if the premises are true. Inductive arguments have conclusions that are probably but not necessarily true based on the premises. Fallacious arguments use invalid reasoning and have conclusions that do not logically follow from the premises.
Types of Arguments (1).pptx
If there is something that would be considered difficult by most of the students but even young researchers, that would be to clearly define an argument and also manage to convey it without sounding judgemental or racist.
LIB440 Week 7.1
1. The document discusses logical fallacies and different types of relevance fallacies. It defines a fallacy as an error in reasoning and explains that relevance fallacies involve premises that are logically irrelevant to the conclusion.
2. The document outlines several types of relevance fallacies, including red herrings, false dilemmas, circular reasoning, appeals to emotion like fear and pity, irrelevant conclusions, wishful thinking, and denial.
3. Examples are provided for each type of fallacy to illustrate how the reasoning is flawed. Readers are encouraged to learn about logical fallacies to strengthen their own arguments and identify poor reasoning in the arguments of others.
What is knowledge 2016 revision jtb conditions not being necessary
This document discusses arguments for and against the justification, belief, and truth (JTB) conditions for knowledge.
It examines arguments that individual JTB conditions are not necessary by considering examples of true belief without justification or belief. However, counterarguments show that in cases like misleading evidence or false beliefs, truth is indeed necessary for knowledge.
Specific examples like beliefs about flamingos being gray or mondegreens show that strongly justified individual beliefs can be false, so justification and belief alone are not sufficient for knowledge - the belief must also be true. Therefore, truth is a necessary condition for knowledge.
Fallacies
The document provides information about different types of logical fallacies, including fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. It defines what a fallacy is, and categorizes them into two types - fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. For fallacies of relevance, it gives examples and explanations of different types like personal attack, attacking the motive, look who's talking, two wrongs make a right, scare tactics, appeal to emotion, bandwagon argument, straw man, red herring, equivocation, and begging the question. For fallacies of insufficient evidence, it discusses false authority, appeal to ignorance, false dilemma, loaded question, false cause, hasty generalization, slippery slope, weak analogy
Topic 3. methods of philosophical reasoning session2
This document provides a summary of 10 common logical fallacies:
1. Argumentum ad Baculum - Appealing to force or threat of force.
2. Appeal to Vanity - Using flattery to gain acceptance of an argument.
3. Argumentum ad Hominem - Attacking the person making an argument.
4. Tu Quoque - Accusing the opponent of the same fault being discussed.
5. Ignoratio Elenchi - Appearing to refute an argument while actually refuting something else.
6. Red Herring - Introducing an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue.
HYOID｜最有生產力的一年（The Productivity Project）
臉書圖文版｜https://goo.gl/j1Iw6d
Medium 詳細文字版｜https://goo.gl/HLezCN
智慧共享的社群人脈學
原本貼文網址：
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1704201253131181.1073741829.1704037009814272&type=3
購書連結：http://goo.gl/AmEfNd
More Related Content
Similar to 第一週學習單：教學用Ppt
Logic 2 validity, other notions
This document defines key logical concepts including:
1. Sentences contain information that can be true or false, while questions, exclamations, and commands do not count as sentences.
2. An argument is invalid if it is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false, or if the conclusion does not follow from the premises. A valid argument is one where the conclusion must be true if the premises are.
3. A sound argument has true premises and is valid, such that the conclusion follows from and is entailed by the premises. Deductive arguments reason from general to particular, while inductive arguments reason from particular to general.
Reason Continued
The document discusses different types of logic, including deductive and inductive reasoning. It notes that deductive reasoning is more certain but less informative than inductive reasoning. It also discusses what distinguishes good generalizations from bad ones, including considering number and variety of examples, exceptions, coherence, and subject area. The document describes how logic can help get closer to truth when premises are true and arguments are valid, but gives examples of when conclusions could be tentatively accepted. It also discusses common fallacies in reasoning such as post hoc, ad hominem, circular reasoning, equivocation, and false dilemmas.
Critical reading
Here is a generative scenario to discuss improving the critical thinking activities:
You are instructors who have been asked to review the critical thinking activities designed by a colleague, John Blake, and provide feedback on how to strengthen them. You notice some issues and have some ideas for improvements. However, you want to have a respectful discussion to understand your colleague's perspective and generate collaborative solutions.
How might you approach John to have a productive discussion? What questions might you ask to better understand the goals and thinking behind the activities? What suggestions could you offer to enhance the learning experience while maintaining a spirit of collaboration?
Take 10 minutes to role play this discussion with your partner. Focus on understanding different perspectives and finding areas of agreement to
Phil21 wk3 arguments & moral reasoning
1. The document discusses moral reasoning and using arguments to validate moral views, noting that beliefs and opinions are propositional claims that can be true or false.
2. It defines what constitutes an argument, noting that a good argument has true premises that are relevant to supporting the conclusion.
3. The document distinguishes between deductive arguments, which aim to prove a conclusion, and inductive arguments, which provide support for a conclusion rather than proving it definitively.
Conditionals
Here are the types of conditionals for the sentences:
1. Zero conditional
2. First conditional
3. Third conditional
4. Zero conditional
5. First conditional
6. Zero conditional
7. Second conditional
8. Third conditional
9. Second conditional
10. Third conditional
Inductive And Deductive Argument.pptx
Deductive Argument
For a deductive argument, if all its premises are true, its conclusion is necessarily true (or it is logically impossible for the conclusion to be false.)
I.e., the truth of premises guarantees the truth of conclusion.
Example
Either you work hard or you will fail the test.
You do not work hard.
Therefore, you will fail the test.
3 Types of Possibility
Technological possibility:
e.g.
Going to the moon is technological possible, but going to Mercury is not.
Physical possibility:
e.g.
Going to Mercury is physical possible, but making water boil at 95 C under one atmospheric pressure is not.
Logical possibility:
e.g.
Making water boil at 95 C under one atmospheric pressure is logical possible, but drawing a triangle with 4 angles is not.
When we talk about deductive arguments, we have already presupposed that the arguments are successful or valid deductive arguments.
The conclusion of a valid argument is called a valid conclusion.
For an unsuccessful deductive argument (the premises are intended to guarantee the conclusion but fail to do so), we call it an invalid argument.
A deductive argument may be valid or invalid, there is nothing in between.
Whether a deductive argument is valid or invalid depends on its form or structure, not on its content.
The above argument is valid because it has this valid form:
p or q.
Not-p.
Therefore, q.
p and q are statement variables.
A valid argument may have false conclusion if it has false premises.
Example:
CY Leung is either a genius or an idiot.
He is not an idiot.
Therefore, He is a genius.
In order to guarantee the truth of conclusion, we have to make sure all the premises are true.
When all the premises of a valid argument are true, the argument is called a “sound argument”.
And the conclusion of a sound argument is called a sound conclusion.
If an argument is invalid or has false premises, it is unsound.
On the other hand, the fact that an argument is invalid does not entail that its conclusion is false.
• It just means that its conclusion does not follow from its premises.
• You can consider a valid argument structure as a truth-keeping machine:
• When you input T information into it, it will output T information.
• When you input F information into it, it will output T or F information
Inductive Argument:
A typical example of inductive argument:
Swan1 is white.
Swan2 is white.
Swan3 is white.
…
Swann is white.
________________
All swans are white.
Another typical example:
An event of type B follows an event of type A at time t1.
An event of type B follows an event of type A at time t2.
…
An event of type B follows an event of type A at time tn.
___________________________
A causes B.
Many people think that the characteristic of inductive arguments is arguing from particular to general.
However, deductive arguments may also argue from particular to general.
Example:
I have two cats, Fluffy and Garfield.
Fluffy does not eat fish.
Garfield does not eat fish either.
Therefore, All of m
LESSON-2-METHOS-OF-PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
Here are examples of statements demonstrating each type of bias:
1. Attribution effect: "He failed the exam so he must be lazy."
2. Confirmation bias: "I don't believe the studies showing vaccines are safe because I'm convinced they cause autism."
3. Framing: "The debate focuses on tax cuts and ignores spending cuts."
4. Hindsight: "In retrospect it was obvious they would get divorced."
5. Conflict of interest: "As an employee of the company, I think their practices are ethical."
6. Cultural bias: "Their parenting style is too permissive based on my cultural upbringing."
Recognizing Fallacies Constructing sound arguments requires .docx
Recognizing Fallacies
Constructing sound arguments requires valid logic and reasoning. If your premises (reasoning) are incorrect they are considered to be “fallacies”. There are several different types of fallacies that exist. Once you recognize the fallacies you are more likely to avoid them in your reasoning.
(Hint: refer to textbook Chapter 11 for more information on fallacies.)
1.
Match
each fallacy with its definition in the chart below.
A. Begging the question
G. Appeal to fear
H. Questionable cause
B. Hasty generalization
C. False dilemma
I. Two wrongs make a right
D Slippery slope J. Misidentification of the cause
E. Appeal to authority
F. Bandwagon
___
.
Also known as circular reasoning because the reasoning assumes the conclusion is true.
___
.
Sometimes occurs due to “peer pressure” or groupthink phenomenon when you may be influenced to conform to the opinion of the group.
___
.
A causal situation where we are unsure of the actual root cause of the issue. It’s possible to ignore a possible cause or to incorrectly assume a common cause.
___
.
This argument states that the action (or conclusion) is a justified response to another wrong action (or conclusion).
___
.
This occurs when there is no real evidence for the argument. Superstitions are a good example of this.
___
.
The “either/or” fallacy – the argument presents only two extreme alternatives and does not allow for alternative options.
___
.
Indicates that one negative action will lead to another, and then another worse one, and so on and so forth all leading to a terrible end result
___
.
Basing a belief on a source or person who is not qualified to give an expert opinion on the subject.
___
.
The argument supports its conclusion not by evidence, but by demands or threats of punishment or misfortune.
___
.
A general conclusion is reached based on a very small sample, so the reasons provide weak support for the conclusion.
Deductive Argument
In a deductive argument, the premises (reasoning) provide such strong support for the conclusion that, if the premises are true, then it would be impossible for the conclusion to be false. Deductive arguments are VALID or INVALID.
EXAMPLE:
Valid
– All children are young.
Johnny is a child.
Therefore, Johnny is young.
Invalid – All children are young.
Johnny is a child.
Therefore, all children are Johnny.
Complete each deductive argument below with a valid conclusion.
2.
Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
Premise 2: I am human.
Conclusion: Therefore, I am _______________
3.
Premise 1: All birds have feathers.
Premise 2: Cardinals are birds.
Conclusion: Therefore, cardinals have _______________
4.
Premise 1: There is a party at work today.
Premise 2: Jimmy is sick and not at work today.
Con.
Mc4 logic and critical thinking
This document discusses different types of logical arguments: deductive arguments, inductive arguments, and fallacious arguments. It provides examples of each type and explains the key differences between them. Deductive arguments have conclusions that are necessarily true if the premises are true. Inductive arguments have conclusions that are probably but not necessarily true based on the premises. Fallacious arguments use invalid reasoning and have conclusions that do not logically follow from the premises.
Types of Arguments (1).pptx
If there is something that would be considered difficult by most of the students but even young researchers, that would be to clearly define an argument and also manage to convey it without sounding judgemental or racist.
LIB440 Week 7.1
1. The document discusses logical fallacies and different types of relevance fallacies. It defines a fallacy as an error in reasoning and explains that relevance fallacies involve premises that are logically irrelevant to the conclusion.
2. The document outlines several types of relevance fallacies, including red herrings, false dilemmas, circular reasoning, appeals to emotion like fear and pity, irrelevant conclusions, wishful thinking, and denial.
3. Examples are provided for each type of fallacy to illustrate how the reasoning is flawed. Readers are encouraged to learn about logical fallacies to strengthen their own arguments and identify poor reasoning in the arguments of others.
What is knowledge 2016 revision jtb conditions not being necessary
This document discusses arguments for and against the justification, belief, and truth (JTB) conditions for knowledge.
It examines arguments that individual JTB conditions are not necessary by considering examples of true belief without justification or belief. However, counterarguments show that in cases like misleading evidence or false beliefs, truth is indeed necessary for knowledge.
Specific examples like beliefs about flamingos being gray or mondegreens show that strongly justified individual beliefs can be false, so justification and belief alone are not sufficient for knowledge - the belief must also be true. Therefore, truth is a necessary condition for knowledge.
Fallacies
The document provides information about different types of logical fallacies, including fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. It defines what a fallacy is, and categorizes them into two types - fallacies of relevance and fallacies of insufficient evidence. For fallacies of relevance, it gives examples and explanations of different types like personal attack, attacking the motive, look who's talking, two wrongs make a right, scare tactics, appeal to emotion, bandwagon argument, straw man, red herring, equivocation, and begging the question. For fallacies of insufficient evidence, it discusses false authority, appeal to ignorance, false dilemma, loaded question, false cause, hasty generalization, slippery slope, weak analogy
Topic 3. methods of philosophical reasoning session2
This document provides a summary of 10 common logical fallacies:
1. Argumentum ad Baculum - Appealing to force or threat of force.
2. Appeal to Vanity - Using flattery to gain acceptance of an argument.
3. Argumentum ad Hominem - Attacking the person making an argument.
4. Tu Quoque - Accusing the opponent of the same fault being discussed.
5. Ignoratio Elenchi - Appearing to refute an argument while actually refuting something else.
6. Red Herring - Introducing an irrelevant topic to divert attention from the original issue.
Similar to 第一週學習單：教學用Ppt (14)
Recognizing Fallacies Constructing sound arguments requires .docx
Recognizing Fallacies Constructing sound arguments requires .docx
What is knowledge 2016 revision jtb conditions not being necessary
What is knowledge 2016 revision jtb conditions not being necessary
Topic 3. methods of philosophical reasoning session2
Topic 3. methods of philosophical reasoning session2
More from Wade Jin
HYOID｜最有生產力的一年（The Productivity Project）
臉書圖文版｜https://goo.gl/j1Iw6d
Medium 詳細文字版｜https://goo.gl/HLezCN
智慧共享的社群人脈學
原本貼文網址：
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1704201253131181.1073741829.1704037009814272&type=3
購書連結：http://goo.gl/AmEfNd
第三屆台大簡報大賽-參賽使用的投影片
使用的設計工具與素材：
1. PPT（完成大部分的製作）
2. Keynote（某幾張加上動畫的效果）
3. illustrator（特殊的物件進行繪圖）
4. freepik （部分的素材下載，進行重製）
5. flaticon
【1027簡報教學投影片】by大學生玩簡報
2015/10/21到學校社團做分享，所準備的教學投影片；把一些開場和結尾的東西拿掉，留下簡報教學的部份。
但因為有一些畫面的設計，包含動畫或者是要實機操作給大家看，所以部分投影片直接閱讀的效果並不會太佳；如果有問題、想要知道的部份，都歡迎提出來。
10/1商業競賽經驗分享講座
商業競賽經驗分享已順利落幕了，非常感謝學長姐們的分享以及各位同學的參與；昨天學長姊們回答了同學們心中的種種疑惑，相信都讓參與的同學滿載而歸！因為時間不行而錯過的同學，也別覺得失望，因為學長姊們很熱心地願意分享投影片給大家，讓參與過的能再次複習，讓沒參與到的也能身歷其境！
-------------------------------------------------
在這次的分享中，三組講者都同意：「團隊裡要有不同領域專長的人！」要有對商業模式很敏感的人，要有對設計、包裝很堅持的人，要有能在台上非常自信提案的人；每個人都發揮自己的專長，並透過良好的團隊合作，方能發揮創意的最大值！
而比賽的過程中，不只要一直被企業打槍，還要避免學校功課被當光光；在巨大的壓力下，不少學長姊都說他們一度都有放棄的念頭。
但是，「放棄是一件容易的事情嘛？」其中一位講者：林伯諺學長，這麼反問大家；放棄不是一件容易的事情，因為比起壓力、比起挫折，學長姊們說：「我們更想為自己當初參賽的願景而奮鬥。」
【簡報的配色魔法（一）理論篇】
上次和大家分享了「品牌色」的概念，但相信很多人不習慣，整體的畫面只有單一的顏色；所以這次大學生玩簡報，來和大家分享基礎的色彩學概念。
希望能幫助大家，對於顏色更敏銳；其中也分享幾個配色的經驗、實例和工具，希望能進一步幫助大家掌握配色的秘訣。
這一次比較多理論、概念，下一篇將會著重在「實戰的配色」；敬請大家期待囉！
總是為配色苦惱嘛？善用品牌色，讓畫面看起來簡潔有力！
「設計，是懂得節制。」
如果說簡報，是讓訊息量化繁為簡，那顏色自然不應該太負責；善用品牌色，使我們不必再擔心畫面色彩不協調。
在對企業、或代表企業對外作提案時，以公司的品牌色，作為整份簡報的主視覺顏色，更是顯現專業的第一步！
下一次，將為大家濃縮出色彩學，最精華、能實戰運用的原則。
讓大家在色彩搭配較複雜的情況，也不會讓畫面太凌亂。
【證券研習營-汽車產業產業研究】by金彥良
●對象：高中生為主的學員們，沒有太多財經知識背景
●自評： 自己對產業研究怎麼做老實說也沒很有概念，所以架構我覺得滿鬆散的(架構算是模仿之前幹部所做的)；我盡量讓一頁的資訊都非常單純，所以總頁數很多。 這樣的風格看起來可能滿簡潔的，但還是不適合商務場合使用，之後有空可能會做一些風格上的修改。
More from Wade Jin (20)
Recently uploaded
Executive Directors Chat Leveraging AI for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Let’s explore the intersection of technology and equity in the final session of our DEI series. Discover how AI tools, like ChatGPT, can be used to support and enhance your nonprofit's DEI initiatives. Participants will gain insights into practical AI applications and get tips for leveraging technology to advance their DEI goals.
Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docx
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)Academy of Science of South Africa
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.Advanced Java[Extra Concepts, Not Difficult].docx
This is part 2 of my Java Learning Journey. This contains Hashing, ArrayList, LinkedList, Date and Time Classes, Calendar Class and more.
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold Method
Odoo provides an option for creating a module by using a single line command. By using this command the user can make a whole structure of a module. It is very easy for a beginner to make a module. There is no need to make each file manually. This slide will show how to create a module using the scaffold method.
The Diamonds of 2023-2024 in the IGRA collection
A review of the growth of the Israel Genealogy Research Association Database Collection for the last 12 months. Our collection is now passed the 3 million mark and still growing. See which archives have contributed the most. See the different types of records we have, and which years have had records added. You can also see what we have for the future.
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in Education
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH 8 CẢ NĂM - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 (CÓ FI...
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH 8 CẢ NĂM - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 (CÓ FI...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
https://app.box.com/s/y977uz6bpd3af4qsebv7r9b7s21935vdISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...
Denis is a dynamic and results-driven Chief Information Officer (CIO) with a distinguished career spanning information systems analysis and technical project management. With a proven track record of spearheading the design and delivery of cutting-edge Information Management solutions, he has consistently elevated business operations, streamlined reporting functions, and maximized process efficiency.
Certified as an ISO/IEC 27001: Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Lead Implementer, Data Protection Officer, and Cyber Risks Analyst, Denis brings a heightened focus on data security, privacy, and cyber resilience to every endeavor.
His expertise extends across a diverse spectrum of reporting, database, and web development applications, underpinned by an exceptional grasp of data storage and virtualization technologies. His proficiency in application testing, database administration, and data cleansing ensures seamless execution of complex projects.
What sets Denis apart is his comprehensive understanding of Business and Systems Analysis technologies, honed through involvement in all phases of the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC). From meticulous requirements gathering to precise analysis, innovative design, rigorous development, thorough testing, and successful implementation, he has consistently delivered exceptional results.
Throughout his career, he has taken on multifaceted roles, from leading technical project management teams to owning solutions that drive operational excellence. His conscientious and proactive approach is unwavering, whether he is working independently or collaboratively within a team. His ability to connect with colleagues on a personal level underscores his commitment to fostering a harmonious and productive workplace environment.
Date: May 29, 2024
Tags: Information Security, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, Artificial Intelligence, GDPR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find out more about ISO training and certification services
Training: ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System - EN | PECB
ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence Management System - EN | PECB
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Training Courses - EN | PECB
Webinars: https://pecb.com/webinars
Article: https://pecb.com/article
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about PECB:
Website: https://pecb.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pecb/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PECBInternational/
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/PECBCERTIFICATION
বাংলাদেশ অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা (Economic Review) ২০২৪ UJS App.pdf
বাংলাদেশের অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা ২০২৪ [Bangladesh Economic Review 2024 Bangla.pdf] কম্পিউটার , ট্যাব ও স্মার্ট ফোন ভার্সন সহ সম্পূর্ণ বাংলা ই-বুক বা pdf বই " সুচিপত্র ...বুকমার্ক মেনু 🔖 ও হাইপার লিংক মেনু 📝👆 যুক্ত ..
আমাদের সবার জন্য খুব খুব গুরুত্বপূর্ণ একটি বই ..বিসিএস, ব্যাংক, ইউনিভার্সিটি ভর্তি ও যে কোন প্রতিযোগিতা মূলক পরীক্ষার জন্য এর খুব ইম্পরট্যান্ট একটি বিষয় ...তাছাড়া বাংলাদেশের সাম্প্রতিক যে কোন ডাটা বা তথ্য এই বইতে পাবেন ...
তাই একজন নাগরিক হিসাবে এই তথ্য গুলো আপনার জানা প্রয়োজন ...।
বিসিএস ও ব্যাংক এর লিখিত পরীক্ষা ...+এছাড়া মাধ্যমিক ও উচ্চমাধ্যমিকের স্টুডেন্টদের জন্য অনেক কাজে আসবে ...
Natural birth techniques - Mrs.Akanksha Trivedi Rama University
Natural birth techniques - Mrs.Akanksha Trivedi Rama UniversityAkanksha trivedi rama nursing college kanpur.
Natural birth techniques are various type such as/ water birth , alexender method, hypnosis, bradley method, lamaze method etcHindi varnamala | hindi alphabet PPT.pdf
हिंदी वर्णमाला पीपीटी, hindi alphabet PPT presentation, hindi varnamala PPT, Hindi Varnamala pdf, हिंदी स्वर, हिंदी व्यंजन, sikhiye hindi varnmala, dr. mulla adam ali, hindi language and literature, hindi alphabet with drawing, hindi alphabet pdf, hindi varnamala for childrens, hindi language, hindi varnamala practice for kids, https://www.drmullaadamali.com
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp Network
Dive into the world of AI! Experts Jon Hill and Tareq Monaur will guide you through AI's role in enhancing nonprofit websites and basic marketing strategies, making it easy to understand and apply.
RPMS TEMPLATE FOR SCHOOL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR TEACHER 1 TO TEACHER 3
RPMS Template 2023-2024 by: Irene S. Rueco
Recently uploaded (20)
Executive Directors Chat Leveraging AI for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Executive Directors Chat Leveraging AI for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold Method
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold Method
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH 8 CẢ NĂM - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 (CÓ FI...
BÀI TẬP BỔ TRỢ TIẾNG ANH 8 CẢ NĂM - GLOBAL SUCCESS - NĂM HỌC 2023-2024 (CÓ FI...
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...
Digital Artefact 1 - Tiny Home Environmental Design
Digital Artefact 1 - Tiny Home Environmental Design
Pride Month Slides 2024 David Douglas School District
Pride Month Slides 2024 David Douglas School District
বাংলাদেশ অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা (Economic Review) ২০২৪ UJS App.pdf
বাংলাদেশ অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা (Economic Review) ২০২৪ UJS App.pdf
Natural birth techniques - Mrs.Akanksha Trivedi Rama University
Natural birth techniques - Mrs.Akanksha Trivedi Rama University
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp Network
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp Network
RPMS TEMPLATE FOR SCHOOL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR TEACHER 1 TO TEACHER 3
RPMS TEMPLATE FOR SCHOOL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR TEACHER 1 TO TEACHER 3
第一週學習單：教學用Ppt
- 2. Proposition Sentence • Claims about the world • True if the world is as claimed ; otherwise, false. • Expressed by sentences
- 3. Same Proposition or Different one? Case I : Andy : “I’m hungry.” Mary : “I’m hungry.” Different Proposition
- 4. Same Proposition or Different one? Case II: Andy : “I’m hungry.” Jack : “Andy is hungry.” Same Proposition
- 5. Same Proposition or Different one? Case III: Taiwanese : “It rains.” Japanese : “It rains.” Different Proposition
- 6. Argument Premise 1 Premise 2 … Premise N ───────── Conclusion Lists of Propositions Argument
- 7. Argument I Premise 1 : I’m a man. Premise 2 : You’re a woman. Conclusion: : I’m better than you. Argument II Premise 1 : You either passed or failed Calculus. Premise 2 : You have not failed Calculus. Conclusion: : I’m better than you. Argument
- 8. Argument I Premise 1 : I’m a man. Premise 2 : You’re a woman. Conclusion: : I’m better than you. Bad Logical Structure
- 9. Argument II Premise 1 : You either passed or failed Calculus. Premise 2 : You have not failed Calculus. Conclusion: : I’m better than you. Whether the proposition is really correct ?
- 10. Necessarily Truth-Preserving(NTP) •True Premises → Truth Conclusion •It is impossible that all premises are true and the conclusion is false. Is this argument a NTP ? P1: John is Mary’s brother. C: Mary is John’s sister.
- 11. Valid Argument NTP • If an argument is a NTP because of its good structure. → This argument is valid.
- 12. Argument I P1: Everyone will die. C: John will die. Argument II P1: Everyone will die. P2: John is human. C: John will die.
- 13. Truth is the property of Propositions. Validity is the property of Arguments. One argument is valid doesn’t guarantee its conclusion is true ! Only if in the case that its premises are all true.
- 14. [True or False]If an argument has all false premises and a true conclusion, it must be invalid. E.g. P1: All students in NCCU are men. P2: Steve Curry is a student in NCCU. C: Steve Curry is a man.