a situation which shows the argument can have a true premise and a false conclusion. shows the argument is INVALID
when coming across a wild argument, we try to render it as a _______ argument. This is ______. ________ is an example of this, and involves removing irrelevant premises. Another way we do this, is by considering the argument as _________.
when coming across a wild argument, we try to render it as a _good_ argument. This is _charity_. _Pruning_ is an example of this, and involves removing irrelevant premises. Another way we do this, is by considering the argument as _non-deductive_.
view which is accepted to be true by a community, and is not contested
one word summing up each Utilitarianism = ___________ Kantianism = __________ Virtue = ___________.
one word summing up each Utilitarianism = _CONSEQUENCES_ Kantianism = _MOTIVATIONS_ Virtue = _CHARACTER_.
burden of proof
to be rationally required to produce evidence for your assertion claims
sentence which can be proven true or false
data functions as _________ because they give reasons to believe a conclusion is true
likely, probable, plausible that
1. I saw charlie at the pub 2. with 6 empty pint glasses 3. so i'm sure he's been drinking 4. therefore he shouldn't be driving which statement(s) are the sub arguments?
1 and 2
random controlled trials
a way to confirm a hypothesis by eliminating variable, isolating the one thing that you want to test. The control group and the trial group are treated the same in a RCT.
time saving bias
thinking you'll get somewhere in much less time by driving faster
what are the features of a fair deal?
1. both parties of sound mind 2. no misrepresentation 3. no coercion or duress which means the parties had no choice 4. no mistakes which lead to a misunderstanding
"is/ought" problem =
switching from descriptive to moral statements, without justifying the move i.e. you cannot derive "ought" from "is: - how things are isn't necessarily the way they should be.
challenged people's beliefs. killed by poison
if testing for cancer what's better... false negative or false positive
false positive obviously.
is falsification/'denying the consequent' a valid or invalid form of argument?
rule of precedent
cases that are legally similar will generally be decided the same way, conforming to the decisions of a higher court. This ensures consistency and certainty in how law is applied.
indicator words of a deductive argument
necessarily, logically, absolutely, certainly, follows that
a claim that something is morally good or bad, right or wrong, or has other moral qualities such as being just, admirable, blameworthy
can't possibly cover every single detail of a story, and therefore can't possibly be a true description. Picking out the parts of the story to tell involves your judgement
"you shouldn't plagiarise" what type of statement?
denying the antecedent is always
premises which support a reason to believe the conclusion is true
arguments are composed of...
"some people think you shouldn't plagiarise" what type of statement?
the harm principle:
Only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over anyone, against his will, is to prevent harm to others
when the researcher unintentionally affects the behaviour of research subjects
sentences which cannot be proven true or false
the right action consistent with good character. Not a habit, but a deep-disposition.
why is suppression of a true statement harmful?
people are deprived of holding or learning true beliefs