Philosophy

© 2012 by**Jensen dG. Mañebog**

IN NATURAL DEDUCTION or providing formal proof for the validity of arguments and other logical operations, symbolizing the argument is the first step. This means correctly translating all the premises and conclusion into symbols. The following are some guides in properly symbolizing statements and arguments:

1. *“One to one correspondence”*. There must only be one symbol (letter) to be used consistently for each simple statement.

2. *Use uppercase letters*. Conventionally, capital letters (e.g. A, B, C) are used to symbolize statements.

3. *Use the first letter of the subject or the predicate*. Unless specified, it is reasonable to choose those letters to represent the whole statement. “Mandy is a student” is thus symbolized as “M”. But if in an argument, there are statements “Mandy is a student” and “He (Mandy) is an athlete”, they should be symbolized as “S” (for student) and “A” (for athlete), respectively.

© 2012 by**Jensen dG. Mañebog**

THE CONCEPT OF NEGATION introduces another operator which is so functional in logical operations, especially in determining the truth of falsity of compound statements with negated components. By **operator**, we mean a symbol, term, or other entity that performs or describes an operation, like the compound-statements symbols.

Considered by some logicians as a special kind of compound statement, **negation** is a statement of denial or contradiction. It can also be interpreted as an assertion that a particular statement is false. The symbol used for negation is the tilde (~) or simply the negative sign (-). “It is not the case that”, “it isn’t true that”, and “it is false that” are the phrases that usually express the idea of negation. Sometimes, the single word ‘not’ embedded in a sentence is enough to indicate negation.

Examples:

WE HAVE TO USE the appropriate rules of inference in constructing formal proofs of arguments’ validity depending on the kind of propositions they use. The following are some basic techniques in properly constructing proof of validity of arguments.

1.Always begin by identifying the conclusion and attempting to look for it in the premises.

2. If the conclusion is a letter that appears in the consequent of a conditional statement in the premises, consider obtaining it through *modus ponens.*

3*.*If the conclusion is a negative statement (negated letter) that appears in the antecedent of a conditional statement in the premises, consider getting it using *modus tollens:*

4. If the conclusion is a conditional statement, consider obtaining it via hypothetical syllogism:

5.If the conclusion is a letter that appears in a disjunctive statement in the premises, consider getting hold of it via disjunctive syllogism.

6. If the conclusion contains a letter that appears in a conjunction in the premises, consider obtaining that letter via simplification...

by @jensenismo

Determine whether the argument is valid or invalid. If the argument is valid, state the rule of inference used. If it is invalid, name the fallacy committed.

1. If millions of children die yearly from starvation, then something is wrong with the government. Millions of children die yearly from starvation.

Therefore, something is wrong with the government.

2. If world population continues to grow, then Manila will become hopelessly overcrowded.

If Manila become hopelessly overcrowded, then Manila will become polluted.

Therefore, if world population continues to grow, then Manila will become polluted.

3. Either the breach is a safety violation, or it is not subject to fines.

The breach is a not safety violation.

Therefore, it is not subject to fines.

TYPES OF INFERENCE

AN **INFERENCE** is a mental process by which we pass from one or more statements to another

that is logically related to the former. Based on the number of their premise, inferences are basically classified into two:

1.**Immediate Inference –** consists in passing directly from a single premise to a conclusion. It is reasoning, without the intermediacy of a middle term or second proposition, from one proposition to another which necessarily follows from it.

**Refer these to your siblings/children/younger friends:**

**HOMEPAGE of Free NAT Reviewers by OurHappySchool.com (Online e-Learning Automated Format)**

**HOMEPAGE of Interesting ARTICLES on Jose Rizal's LOVE Life, Works, and Writings**

2.**Mediate Inference-** consists in deriving a conclusion from two or more logically interrelated premises. Involving an advance in knowledge, it is reasoning that involves the intermediacy of a middle term or second proposition which warrants the drawing of a new truth.

The importance of Critical Thinking is emphasized by the fact that it calls for the ability to:

1. Recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems

2. Understand the importance of prioritization and order of precedence in problem solving

3. Gather and marshal pertinent (relevant) information

4. Recognize unstated assumptions and values

5. Comprehend and use language with accuracy, clarity, and discernment

6. Interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments ...

“EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE and a place for everything”

Our mind is a repository of wealth of information that needs methodical and and easy-to-use tool in accessing what we need to use in our everyday conversation, decision making, and for just simple mental recall. As rational beings, we most of the times need to organize our thoughts. Besides definition, we have another method of making our ideas clear in order to arrive at a better understanding of their meaning: the method of division and classification ...

Epistemology is a branch of knowledge which deals with the study of scope, limits, and validity of knowledge. This terminology originated from two Greek words *episteme *which means to know and *logos *which means study. Practically speaking, almost all of epistemological claims in whatever line of inquiry – whether be it social or behavioral sciences or pure or applied mathematics, three fundamental questions must be satisfied: the first is *What can I know? *The second question is *How can I know? *And the third question is *Why do I have to know? *

The first question deals with the scope and possible limitation of what man can know as far as knowledge of the external world is concerned; the second question deals with the *methodology *or manner of acquiring knowledge ...

WEEK 1

I. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES:

To state the importance of Logic in communication and in man’s being social

II. TOPICS/SUBJECT MATTER:

‘LOGIC IN COMMUNICATION’; ‘Language is Logic’; Logic in good usage; The 2 kinds of reasoning; Validity & probability (brief orientation)

III. READING/S:

Internet articles: “‘**Logically’ Social (I)**” & “‘**Logically’ social (II)**”

IN LOGIC, the statement that relates two classes or “categories” is called a **categorical proposition**. The classes in question are denoted respectively by the **subject term** and the **predicate term**. In effect, this type of proposition **gives a direct assertion of agreement or disagreement between the two terms. **The proposition asserts that either *all* or *part* of the class denoted by the subject term is *included* in or *excluded from* the classes denoted by the predicate term. Here are some examples of categorical statement.

The first example asserts that the whole class of dogs are included in the class of mammals; the second declares that the entire class of acids are excluded from the class of bases; the third states that a part of philosophers are included in the class of mathematicians; and the last one claims that a part of the class of Americans are excluded from the class of cheaters ...