Philosophy And Human Existence Textbook PdfBy Susanne L. In and pdf 26.03.2021 at 14:43 10 min read
File Name: philosophy and human existence textbook .zip
Philosophy is a discipline and a process.
The Challenge of Chance pp Cite as. Our laws of nature and our cosmos appear to be delicately fine-tuned for life to emerge, in a way that seems hard to attribute to chance. We analyze this issue from a sober perspective. In fact, fine-tuning and Design even seem to be at odds with each other, whereas the inference from fine-tuning to a Multiverse only works if the latter is underwritten by an additional metaphysical hypothesis we consider unwarranted. Instead, we suggest that fine-tuning requires no special explanation at all, since it is not the Universe that is fine-tuned for life, but life that has been fine-tuned to the Universe.
grade 12 philosophy textbook pdf
Two competing conceptions of fallacies are that they are false but popular beliefs and that they are deceptively bad arguments.
These we may distinguish as the belief and argument conceptions of fallacies. Academic writers who have given the most attention to the subject of fallacies insist on, or at least prefer, the argument conception of fallacies, but the belief conception is prevalent in popular and non-scholarly discourse. As we shall see, there are yet other conceptions of what fallacies are, but the present inquiry focuses on the argument conception of fallacies. Being able to detect and avoid fallacies has been viewed as a supplement to criteria of good reasoning.
The knowledge of fallacies is needed to arm us against the most enticing missteps we might take with arguments—so thought not only Aristotle but also the early nineteenth century logicians Richard Whately and John Stuart Mill.
But as the course of logical theory from the late nineteenth-century forward turned more and more to axiomatic systems and formal languages, the study of reasoning and natural language argumentation received much less attention, and hence developments in the study of fallacies almost came to a standstill.
Until well past the middle of the twentieth century, discussions of fallacies were for the most part relegated to introductory level textbooks. It was only when philosophers realized the ill fit between formal logic, on the one hand, and natural language reasoning and argumentation, on the other, that the interest in fallacies has returned. In modern fallacy studies it is common to distinguish formal and informal fallacies. Formal fallacies are those readily seen to be instances of identifiable invalid logical forms such as undistributed middle and denying the antecedent.
Although many of the informal fallacies are also invalid arguments, it is generally thought to be more profitable, from the points of view of both recognition and understanding, to bring their weaknesses to light through analyses that do not involve appeal to formal languages. In the following essay, which is in four parts, it is what is considered the informal-fallacy literature that will be reviewed.
Part 1 is an introduction to the core fallacies as brought to us by the tradition of the textbooks. Part 2 reviews the history of the development of the conceptions of fallacies as it is found from Aristotle to Copi. Part 3 surveys some of the most recent innovative research on fallacies, and Part 4 considers some of the current research topics in fallacy theory. By way of introduction, a brief review of the core fallacies, especially as they appear in introductory level textbooks, will be given.
Only very general definitions and illustrations of the fallacies can be given. This proviso is necessary first, because, the definitions or identity conditions of each of the fallacies is often a matter of contention and so no complete or final definition can be given in an introductory survey; secondly, some researchers wish that only plausible and realistic instances of each fallacy be used for illustration.
This also is not possible at this stage. The advantage of the stock examples of fallacies is that they are designed to highlight what the mistake associated with each kind of fallacy is supposed to be.
Additional details about some of the fallacies are found in Sections 2 and 3. As an initial working definition of the subject matter, we may take a fallacy to be an argument that seems to be better than it really is.
The fallacy of equivocation is an argument which exploits the ambiguity of a term or phrase which has occurred at least twice in an argument, such that on the first occurrence it has one meaning and on the second another meaning.
A familiar example is:. The end of life is death. Happiness is the end of life. So, death is happiness. That the same set of words is used twice conceals the fact that the two distinct meanings undermine the continuity of the reasoning, resulting in a non-sequitur.
The fallacy of amphiboly is, like the fallacy of equivocation, a fallacy of ambiguity; but here the ambiguity is due to indeterminate syntactic structure. In the argument:. The police were told to stop drinking on campus after midnight. So, now they are able to respond to emergencies much better than before. On one reading it can be taken to mean that it is the police who have been drinking and are now to stop it; this makes for a plausible argument. On another reading what is meant is that the police were told to stop others e.
If that is the sense in which the premise is intended, then the argument can be said to be a fallacy because despite initial appearances, it affords no support for the conclusion. The fallacies of composition and division occur when the properties of parts and composites are mistakenly thought to be transferable from one to the other. Consider the two sentences:. The fallacy of composition is the inference from a to b but it need not hold if members of the team cannot work cooperatively with each other.
The reverse inference from b to a —the fallacy of division—may also fail if some essential members of the team have a supportive or administrative role rather than a research role.
The fallacy of begging the question petitio principii can occur in a number of ways. It is a disguised instance of repetition which gives no reason for its apparent conclusion. Another version of begging the question can occur in contexts of argumentation where there are unsettled questions about key terms. Then, should an arguer gives this argument:. That is, if the premise is accepted without further justification, the arguer is assuming the answer to a controversial question without argument.
Neither of these versions of begging the question are faulted for their invalidity, so they are not charged with being non-sequitors like most of the core fallacies; they are, however, attempted proofs that do not transparently display their weakness. But, given our allegiance to the modern conception of logic as being solely concerned with the following-from relation, forms of begging the question should be thought of as epistemic rather than logical fallacies.
Some versions of begging the question are more involved and are called circular reasoning. They include more than one inference. The fallacy known as complex question or many questions is usually explained as a fallacy associated with questioning. Some say that this kind of mistake is not really a fallacy because to ask a question is not to make an argument. There are a number of fallacies associated with causation, the most frequently discussed is post hoc ergo propter hoc , after this, therefore because of this.
This fallacy ascribes a causal relationship between two states or events on the basis of temporal succession. For example,. Unemployment decreased in the fourth quarter because the government eliminated the gasoline tax in the second quarter.
The decrease in unemployment that took place after the elimination of the tax may have been due to other causes; perhaps new industrial machinery or increased international demand for products. Other fallacies involve confusing the cause and the effect, and overlooking the possibility that two events are not directly related to each other but are both the effect of a third factor, a common cause.
These fallacies are perhaps better understood as faults of explanation than faults of arguments. The fallacy of ignoratio elenchi , or irrelevant conclusion, is indicative of misdirection in argumentation rather than a weak inference. The claim that Calgary is the fastest growing city in Canada, for example, is not defeated by a sound argument showing that it is not the biggest city in Canada.
Two things went wrong: the proponent does not hold b , and even if she did, the falsity of b does not imply the falsity of a. The ad verecundiam fallacy concerns appeals to authority or expertise. Fundamentally, the fallacy involves accepting as evidence for a proposition the pronouncement of someone who is taken to be an authority but is not really an authority. This can happen when non-experts parade as experts in fields in which they have no special competence—when, for example, celebrities endorse commercial products or social movements.
See also 2. The fallacy ad populum is similar to the ad verecundiam , the difference being that the source appealed to is popular opinion, or common knowledge, rather than a specified authority. So, for example:. These days everyone except you has a car and knows how to drive; So, you too should have a car and know how to drive. There are few subjects on which the general public can be said to hold authoritative opinions.
The ad baculum fallacy is one of the most controversial because it is hard to see that it is a fallacy or even that it involves bad reasoning. So, for example,. Such threats do give us reasons to act and, unpleasant as the interlocutor may be, there seems to be no fallacy here. In labour disputes, and perhaps in international relations, using threats such as going on strike, or cutting off trade routes, are not normally considered fallacies, even though they do involve intimidation and the threat of harm.
The fallacy ad misericordiam is a companion to the ad baculum fallacy: it occurs not when threats are out of place but when appeals for sympathy or pity are mistakenly thought to be evidence. To what extent our sympathy for others should influence our actions depends on many factors, including circumstances and our ethical views.
However, sympathy alone is generally not evidence for believing any proposition. You should believe that he is not guilty of embezzling those paintings; think of how much his family suffered during the Depression. Ad misericordiam arguments, like ad baculum arguments, have their natural home in practical reasoning; it is when they are used in theoretical doxastic argumentation that the possibility of fallacy is more likely.
The ad hominem fallacy involves bringing negative aspects of an arguer, or their situation, to bear on the view they are advancing. There are three commonly recognized versions of the fallacy. The hunter Thompson, although she broke the law, may nevertheless have a very good plan for the wetlands. Another, more subtle version of the fallacy is the circumstantial ad hominem in which, given the circumstances in which the arguer finds him or herself, it is alleged that their position is supported by self-interest rather than by good evidence.
Hence, the scientific studies produced by industrialists to show that the levels of pollution at their factories are within the law may be undeservedly rejected because they are thought to be self-serving. Yet it is possible that the studies are sound: just because what someone says is in their self-interest, does not mean it should be rejected. The third version of the ad hominem fallacy is the tu quoque. It involves not accepting a view or a recommendation because the espouser him- or herself does not follow it.
Thus, if our neighbor advises us to exercise regularly and we reject her advice on the basis that she does not exercise regularly, we commit the tu quoque fallacy: the value of advice is not wholly dependent on the integrity of the advisor.
The fallacy of faulty analogy occurs when analogies are used as arguments or explanations and the similarities between the two things compared are too remote to support the conclusion. If a child gets a new toy he or she will want to play with it; So, if a nation gets new weapons, it will want to use them. In this example due to Churchill , there is a great difference between using playing with toys and using discharging weapons. The former is done for amusement, the latter is done to inflict harm on others.
Playing with toys is a benign activity that requires little justification; using weapons against others nations is something that is usually only done after extensive deliberation and as a last resort. Hence, there is too much of a difference between using toys and using weapons to conclude that a nation, if it acquires weapons, will want to use them as readily as children will want to play with their toys. The fallacy of the slippery slope generally takes the form that from a given starting point one can by a series of incremental inferences arrive at an undesirable conclusion, and because of this unwanted result, the initial starting point should be rejected.
The kinds of inferences involved in the step-by-step argument can be causal, as in:. The weakness in this argument, the reason why it is a fallacy, lies in the second and third causal claims. The series of small steps that lead from an acceptable starting point to an unacceptable conclusion may also depend on vague terms rather than causal relations.
Hence, at each step in the argument until the final hair-plucking, we should continue to conclude that the man is bearded. In both these cases apparently good reasoning leads to a false conclusion.
The competition is held online on the website www. Ethiopian Grade 12 TextBook. It is both a view and a way of life. His life is a process of development which tends towards, something which is more perfect. They can access these chapters anywhere and use them for their studies. Grade 12 Philosophy allows students to better understand of the broad nature of philosophy through the exploration of metaphysics, ethics, social and political philosophy.
Lagos. Introduction to Philosophy. Logic and Human Existence is one of the general studios courses for students in higher educational institutions in Nigeria.
LOGIC, PHILOSOPHY AND HUMAN EXISTENCE
A marketing company called Acxiom has collected detailed personal information on billions of consumers across the globe. Aside from the usual data such as your name, address and phone number, Acxiom knows your income, the kind of house you live in, car you drive, food you eat, pets you have, music you listen to, and even your exercise preference. Knowing what kind of person you are, Acxiom is able to predict the things you will buy in the future. It may bother you to know that Acxiom is accumulating your personal information and passing it on to countless other businesses.
Two competing conceptions of fallacies are that they are false but popular beliefs and that they are deceptively bad arguments. These we may distinguish as the belief and argument conceptions of fallacies. Academic writers who have given the most attention to the subject of fallacies insist on, or at least prefer, the argument conception of fallacies, but the belief conception is prevalent in popular and non-scholarly discourse.
Слова Сьюзан Флетчер о том, что ключ находится в Испании, показались ему обнадеживающими. Он бросил быстрый взгляд на Сьюзан, которая по-прежнему сидела на стуле, обхватив голову руками и целиком уйдя в. Фонтейн не мог понять, в чем дело, но, какими бы ни были причины ее состояния, выяснять это сейчас не было времени. - Нужно решать, сэр! - требовал Джабба. - Немедленно.
Какой идиот станет делать на кольце надпись из произвольных букв. Фонтейн свирепым взглядом заставил его замолчать. - Вы меня слышите? - вмешался Беккер, чувствуя себя неловко. - Вы все время говорите о произвольном наборе букв. Мне кажется, я должен вам сказать… что это не случайный набор букв. Все на подиуме воскликнули: - Что. В голосе Беккера слышались извиняющиеся нотки: - Простите, но это определенно осмысленные слова.
Действительно. - Клушар вздохнул с видом мученика, вынужденного терпеть всякий сброд. - Вы когда-нибудь видели что-либо более ужасное, чем это место? - Он обвел глазами палату. - Не больница, а помойка. И они еще решили оставить меня здесь на ночь. Беккер огляделся: - Понимаю. Это ужасно.
Правда открылась со всей очевидностью: Хейл столкнул Чатрукьяна.
EDU - ЕТ? - спросила Сьюзан. У нее кружилась голова. - Энсей Танкадо и есть Северная Дакота.
Возможные последствия полученного известия словно пулей пронзили Джаббу. Казалось, тучный шеф отдела обеспечения системной безопасности вот-вот рухнет на пол. - Мертв.
EDU МЕНЯЮЩИЙСЯ ОТКРЫТЫЙ ТЕКСТ ДЕЙСТВУЕТ.